BR  346  .A2513  1901 
Zwingli,  Ulrich,  1484-1531. 
Selected  works  of  Huldreict 
Zwingli  (1484-1531) 


SELECTED  WORKS  ^^^  ^^  Pfi'■^ 

-       (      DEC1519/ 

HULDREICH   ZWINGlir^ 

(1484-1531) 

THE  REFORMER  OF  GERMAN  SWITZERLAND. 

TRANSLATED  FOR  THE  FIRST  TIME  FROM  THE  ORIGINALS. 


The  German  Works  by  Lawrence  A.  McLouth,  Professor  of  German  in  New 

York  University,  and  the  Latin  by  Henry  Preble,  New  York  City, 

and  Professor  George  W.  Gilmore,  Meadville,  Pennsylvania. 


EDITED 
WITH  GENERAL  AND  SPECIAL  INTRODUCTIONS  AND  OCCASIONAL  NOTES 

BY 

SAMUEL  MACAULEY  JACKSON, 

PROFESSOR  OF  CHURCH  HISTORY   IN   NEW   YORK    UNIVERSITY;    EDITOR   OF    "THE  HEROES  OF 
THE  REFORMATION,"  AND  AUTHOR  IN  THAT  SERIES  OF  THE  LIFE  OF  HULDREICH  ZWINGLI. 


PHILADELPHIA: 

UNIVERSITY    OF    PENNSYLVANIA. 

I9OI. 

SOLD  BY 

LONGMANS,  GREEN  &  CO., 

91  and  93  Fifth  Avenue,  New  York. 


Copyright,  1901, 

BY 

SAMUEL  MACAULEY  JACKSON. 


PREFACE. 


This  volume  presents  a  selection  from  the  contents  of  the 
eight  volumes  in  which  the  works  of  Huldreich  ZwingH,  the 
Reformer  of  German  Switzerland,  are  preserved  in  the  only 
edition  now  accessible,  namely,  that  published  in  Zurich  between 
1828  and  1842,  with  a  supplement  in  1861.  Egli  and  Finsler's 
edition  in  the  Corpus  Reformaiorum  is  announced  but  will  not 
be  finished  for  at  least  ten  years.  The  selection  has  been  made 
purposely  from  th.ose  papers  which  had  never  been  translated 
— at  least  not  in  their  entirety — into  modern  German  or  English. 
These  papers  have  been  arranged  in  chronological  order,  and 
when  read  consecutively  present  a,  documentary  history  of  several 
phases  of  the  Zurich  Reformation.  They  have  been  utilized 
in  my  biography  of  ZwingH,  published  by  G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons, 
New  York  city,  in  the  series  of  ''  Heroes  of  the  Reformation," 
and  are  here  printed  in  full  by  the  courtesy  of  the  publishers  of 
the  series.  As  appears,  the  translations  from  the  Latin  were 
made  by  Mr.  Henry  Preble,  of  this  city,  and  by  Prof.  George 
W.  Gilmore,  and  those  from  the  Zurich  German  by  Mr.  Law- 
rence A.  McLouth,  Professor  of  German  in  the  New  York 
University.  They  will  be  found  accurate  and  spirited,  and  I  am 
very  proud  to  be  able  to  put  into  the  hands  of  the  English 
reader  for  the  first  time  matter  of  so  interesting  and  important  a 
character.  My  highest  ambition  is  that  Huldreich  Zwingli  may 
win  in  this  way  a  large  number  of  friends.  My  own  part  in  this  new 
volume  is  a  very  modest  one.  I  have  made  the  selections,  sup- 
plied some  introductory  matter,  and  a  few  notes.  Those  who 
would  like  to  read  more  of  the  writings  of  Zwingli  I  refer  to 

(3) 


4  PREFACE. 

my  biography  alluded  to  above,  in  which  will  be  found  Pro- 
fessor Mc Louth's  translation  in  full  of  the  sermon  upon  fasting, 
preached  in  the  spring  of  1522,  which  was  the  first  published 
reformation  document  in  Switzerland ;  and  the  Confession  of 
Faith  presented  by  Zwingii  at  the  Diet  of  Augsburg,  1530, 
translated  by  Rev.  Henry  E.  Jacobs,  D.  D.,  LL.  D.,  Professor 
in  the  Evangelical  Lutheran  Seminary,  Philadelphia,  Pa. ;  re- 
printed by  permission,  from  Dr.  Jacobs'  edition  of  the  Book  of 
ComorJ,  Philadel])hia,  the  best  edition  of  that  important  collec- 
tion and  its  accompanying  documents.  Also,  I  would  say  that 
in  1S99,  in  CoUegeville,  Pa.,  there  appeared  a  translation  of 
Zwingli's  "  Christian  Education  of  Youth,",  by  Professor  Reichen- 
bach,  of  Ursinus  College,  Philadelphia.  I  am  not  aware  that 
there  are  any  other  accessible  English  translations  of  Zwingli's 
prose  writings,  but  in  my  biography  appear  in  English  many 
extracts  from  Zwingli's  correspondence  and  from  documents 
bearing  upon  him. 

Samuel  Macauley  Jackson. 
New  York  City,  April  S,  igoi. 


INTRODUCTION. 


HuLDREiCH  ZwiNGLi  was  bom  in  the  outskirts  of  the  village  of 
Wildhaus,  forty  miles  east  by  south  of  Zurich,  in  Switzerland,  on 
the  first  of  January,  1484.  His  family  on  both  sides  were  peas- 
ants, but  persons  of  more  or  less  prominence  and  of  high  char- 
acter. His  father  was  the  village  magistrate  and  his  father's 
brother  the  village  priest.  This  uncle  was  in  1487  transferred  to 
a  higher  position  at  Wesen,  upon  the  Lake  of  Walenstadt,  twelve 
miles  to  the  southwest  of  Wildhaus,  and  took  Zwingli  with  him. 
So  there  the  child  received  his  first  book  learning,  and  then  he 
was  sent  by  his  uncle,  who  was  providentially  a  friend  of  the  New 
Learning,  to  Bern,  Vienna  and  Basel  for  school  and  university 
training.  In  1506  Zwingli,  who  had  just  taken  the  degree  of 
Master  of  Arts  at  the  University  of  Basel,  became  the  priest  of 
the  parish  of  Glarus,  about  seven  miles  south  of  Wesen.  There 
he  remained  ten  years,  and  would  have  stayed  much  longer, 
probably,  had  it  not  been  that  his  very  vigorous  attacks  upon  the 
mercenary  military  service  of  the  Swiss,  which  service  he  recog- 
nized as  a  disgrace  to  his  country  and  a  sure  and  swift  means  of 
their  moral  ruin,  awakened  so  much  opposition  on  the  part  of  the 
principal  families  in  the  Canton,  who  were  interested  in  hiring 
out  these  mercenaries,  that  he  was  compelled  to  leave.  He  next 
appears  as  preacher  in  the  famous  monastery  of  Einsiedeln,  in 
which  is  the  Chapel  of  Meinrad,  containing  the  wonder-working 
wooden  image  of  the  Virgin  and  Child.  Thousands  of  pilgrims 
have  every  year  for  a  millennium  visited  this  sacred  spot,  and 
among  them  have  been  the  most  distinguished  in  the  Church. 
When  Zwingli  went  there  he  was  already  a  fine  scholar,  an  admired 

(5) 


6  INTRODUCTION. 

preacher  and  a  recognized  patriot.  He  inspired  high  and  low 
with  respect,  and  easily  made  the  acquaintance  of  the  cardinals 
and  bishops  and  learned  men  who  came  in  a  continuous  stream 
to  the  shrine.  He  also  read  diligently  the  books  he  found  in  the 
remarkably  rich  library  of  the  monastery.  Thus  was  he  prepared 
for  the  prominent  part  he  was  destined  to  play.  After  two  years 
he  was  called  to  the  principal  church  of  Zurich,  and  there  he 
maintained  himself  as  preacher  and  reformer  and  author  for  the 
rest  of  his  life. 

When  he  began  his  preaching  in  Zurich  he  had  apparently  no 
profound  spiritual  conceptions.  He  was  an  extremely  pleasant, 
witty  and  agreeable  man,  and  had  a  host  of  friends,  for  whose 
advantage  he  was  ready  at  any  time  to  do  his  best,  so  that  he 
fastened  them  to  himself  as  with  hooks  of  steel.  He  was  moreover 
a  friend  of  the  New  Learning  and  felt  the  breath  of  the  new  era. 
He  had  been  taught  by  Wyttenbach  and  Erasmus  that  the  tradi- 
tional church  theology  had  very  small  basis  in  the  Bible ;  had 
also  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  Bible  was  the  great  source 
of  theolog}',  so  had  been  reading  attentively  the  New  Testament 
in  the  original  Greek,  and  had  even  begun  the  study  of  Hebrew  in 
order  that  he  might  get  at  the  meaning  of  the  Old  Testament  at 
first  hand.  In  his  zeal  to  drink  in  the  water  of  life  from  the 
fountain  he  even  had  gone  so  far  as  to  commit  to  memory  the 
Epistles  of  St.  Paul  in  (ireek.  From  the  beginning  of  his  Zurich 
ministry  he  sliowed  himself  well  acquainted  with  the  text  of  Scrip- 
ture, and  able  to  quote  it  at  pleasure.  He  began  his  preaching 
in  Zurich  with  a  contmuous  exposition  of  the  Gospel  of  Matthew, 
and  went  on  to  expound  other  New  Testament  "books  in  the  same 
way.  Living  thus  in  the  hearing  of  the  divine  oracles,  thinking 
much  upon  their  utterances,  he  was  one  of  the  first  upon  whom 
the  vision  of  the  purer,  more  unshackled,  less  hide-bound  church 
fell.  And  without  passing  through  any  profound  spiritual 
experience,  entering  rather  as  a  devout  scholar  than  as  a  religious 
enthusiast  into  the  temple  of  God,  he  arrived  at  those  concep- 


INTRODUCTION.  y 

tions  of  the  truth  which  bear  the  name  of  Protestant.  It  was  his 
exposure  of  the  unbiblical  character  of  much  of  the  teachings 
ajid  ceremonies  of  the  Roman  Church  which  roused  the  people 
of  Zurich  into  open  revolt  against  that  church,  and  it  was  the 
distressing  rumor  of  the  probable  defection  of  the  Zurich  people 
which  was  the  occasion  of  the  visit  of  the  delegation  from  the 
Bishop  of  Constance,  which  is  described  in  the  first  paper  in  this 
volume. 

In  this  volume  Zwingli  is  exhibited  in  various  relations  as 
leader  in  reform  and  the  defense  of  reform.  Thus  the  earnest 
petition  (1522)  which  Zwingli  wrote,  to  allow  priests  to  marry, 
showed  how  enforced  celibacy  hindered  holy  living.  The  First 
Disputation  (1523)  showed  the  popularity  of  the  proposed 
reforms.  The  Marriage  Ordinance  (1525)  is  a  contribution 
to  the  history  of  the  times.  The  reply  to  the  Baptist  arguments 
and  exposure  of  their  social  disorders  (1527),  for  the  Baptists 
were  the  disturbers  of  the  standing  order  in  Zurich  and  fomenters 
of  no  one  end  of  trouble  for  the, Reformers  there  and  in  Ger- 
many, and  the  treatment  they  received,  showed  how  far  the 
Reformers  were  from  being  ready  to  grant  to  others  the  freedom 
of  speech  they  exercised  themselves.  Still  the  Baptists  were 
attacked  on  grounds  of  state  polity  rather  than  religiously. 

The  busy  life  of  Zwingli,  on  whom  fell  the  burden  of  directing 
the  churches  which  received  his  leadership,  was  cut  short  by  a 
violent  death.  He  was  involved  in  the  struggle  between  the 
Forest  cantons  (Uri,  Schwyz,  Unterwalden,  Luzern,  Zug)  up 
amid  the  mountains  of  Northern  Switzerland,  which  were  intensely 
Old  Church,  and  the  Reformed  cantons  (chiefly  Zurich  and 
Bern) .  The  former  would  not  gi^nt  freedom  to  gospel  pieaching, 
so  the  latter  in  punishment  cut  them  oil  from  necessary  supplies, 
as  they  could  do,  since  they  commanded  the  commerce  of  the 
country.  This  brought  matters  to  a  crisis,  and  the  opposing 
cantons  met  at  Cappel,  only  10  miles  south  of  Zurich,  October 
II,  1 53 1.     Zwingli,  as  chief  city  pastor,  went  to  the  field  as  a 


8  INTRODUCTION. 

non-combatint,  although  armed  for  defense,  and  perished  the 
same  day.  He  was  a  good  man,  a  valiant  fighter  for  the  truth 
as  he  conceived  it,  and  the  Reformed  churches,  as  contrasted 
with  the  Lutheran  churches,  look  to  him  as  one  of  their  great 
founders. 


TABLK  OK  CONTKNTS. 


PAGK 

Preface , 3 

iNTRODUCl'ION 5 

I.  Visit  of  the  Episcopal  Delegation  to  Zurich,  April,  1522 9 

II.  The  Petition  of  Eleven  Priests  to  be  Allowed  to  Marry,  July, 

1522 25 

III.  The  Acts  of  the  First  Zurich  Disputation,  January,  1523 40 

IV.  Zurich  Marriage  Ordinance,  1525 .' 118 

V.  Refutation  of  the  Tricks  of  the  Catabaptists,  1527  * 123 

*  This  is  the  literal  rendering  of  the  title  of  the  Treatise,  but  as  the  Baptists  are  meant 
called  them  so  on  p.  123.     Subsequent  reflection  led  me  to  think  it  would  have  been  better  to 
have  kept  the  original  form,  but  the  book  being  printed  from  type  I  was  not  able  to  restore 
the  correct  title  in  this  edition. « 


ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 


I.  LETTER  OF  HULDREICH  ZWINGLI  TO  ERASMUS 
FABRICIUS  ABOUT  THE  PROCEEDINGS,  ON  THE  7th, 
8th  and  9TH  OF  APRIL,  1522,  OF  THE  DELEGATES 
SENT  TO  ZURICH  BY  THE  BISHOP  OF  CONSTANCE.* 

How  the  Reverend  Lord  Bishop  of  Constance,  through  his 
delegates,  the  suffragan  Melchior  [Watth],  John  Wanner  (who, 
however,  I  know  took  part  in  the  affair  against  his  will),  and 
N[icholas]  Brendlin,  dealt  with  Huldreich  Zwingli,  preacher  at 
Zurich,  before  the  Board  of  Ecclesiastics  and  the  Senate  f  on  the 
7th,  8th  and  9th  days  of  April. 

ZWINGLI    TO    ERASMUS    FABRICIUS. 

On  the  seventh  day  of  April  the  before  mentioned  Fathers 
came  to  our  city  pretty  early,  and  I,  knowing  that  they  were 
coming,  was  trying  to  discover  what  their  design  was,  and  yet 
could  not  until  late  at  night,  when  our  beloved  deacon,  Henry 
Lutius,  came  and  gave  me  warning  that  the  clerk,  as  they  call 
him,  was  getting  together  the  whole  body  of  priests  for  a  meeting 

*  Zwingli's  Works,  ed.  Schuler  u.  Schulthess,  iii.,  7-16.  Translated  from 
the  original  Latin  by  Mr.  Henry  Preble,  New  York  city. 

1 1,  e.,  City  Council,  hence  the  members  in  it  are  called  councillors,  but  the 
Latin  form  Zwingli  used  has  been  allowed  to  stand.  This  body  was  in  two 
parts,  the  Small  Council,  which  contained  only  50  members,  and  only  half  of 
these  were  on  duty  at  any  one  time,  and  the  Great  Council,  also  called  the 
Council  of  the  Two  Hundred,  which  included  the  Small  Council.  The  Great 
Council  was  the  deciding  body  on  all  legislative  matters  of  importance,  the 
Small  was  the  exeutive  committee,  and  both  were  representative  bodies.  The 
chief  officer  was  the  burgomaster,  here  called  the  President  of  the  Senate. 
See  my  biography  of  Zwingli,  pp.  42-44. 

(9) 


lo  znvin(;li  selections. 

early  next  morning  at  the  usual  place  of  assembly  of  the  canons. 
I  regarded  it  as  a  happy  omen  that  the  thing  had  been  thus  neatly 
set  on  foot  by  a  courier  both  lame  and  without  grace,  and  began 
to  consider  in  my  mind  how  they  were  likely  to  begin  their  job. 
At  length  I  understood,  as  I  thought,  and  when  day  dawned  and 
we  had  come  together  the  suffragan  began  in  the  fashion  that  will 
follow  when  I  come  to  describe  how  the  matter  was  carried  on 
before  the  Senate.  His  whole  speech  was  violent  and  full  of 
rage  and  arrogance,  though  he  took  pains  to  hide  the  fact  that 
he  had  any  quarrel  with  me.  For  he  avoided  mentioning  my 
name  as  scrupulously  as  if  it  were  sacred,  though  meanwhile  there 
was  nothing  that  he  didn't  say  against  me.-  When  the  tragedian 
had  finished  shrieking  out  his  part,  I  stepped  forward,  feeling 
that  it  was  unbecoming  and  disgraceful  to  allow  a  speech  which 
might  do  so  much  damage  to  go  un rebutted,  especially  as  I  saw 
from  their  sighs  and  their  pale  and  silent  faces  that  some  of  the 
feebler  priests  who  had  recently  been  won  for  Christ  had  been 
troubled  by  the  tirade.  Therefore  I  made  answer  upon  the  spur 
-of  the  moment  to  the  words  of  the  suffragan,  with  what  spirit  or 
feeling  the  good  men  who  heard  me  may  judge.  The  general 
gist  of  what  I  said,  however,  you  shall  hear  when  we  come  to  the 
proceedings  before  the  Senate.  The  delegates  abandoned  this 
wing  as  routed  and  put  to  flight,  and  hurried  quickly  to  another, 
to  the  Senate,  namely,  where,  as  I  have  learned  from  Senators, 
the  same  ha^^angue  was  delivered  and  my  name  was  avoided  in  the 
same  way,  and  the  Senate  was  persuaded  not  to  have  me  sum- 
moned. For  they  said  they  had  no  concern  whatever  with  me. 
After  this  the  opinions  varied  for  some  time,  but  finally  they 
decided  that  the  Commons  (that  is,  two  hundred  men,  called 
the  Greater  Senate),  should  meet  in  full  assembly  on  the  follow- 
ing day,  and  that  the  bishops  *  of  the  city,  of  whom  there  are  three 

♦  Zwingli  uses  this  term  of  the  people's  priests  or  preachers  of  the  three 
parish  churches  in  Zurich,  viz.,  the  Great  Minster,  Minster  of  our  Lady, 
and  St.  I'etcr's.     He  explains  it  below. 


THE    EPISCOPAL   VISITATION.  II 

of  US,  should  be  warned  not  to  be  present.  For  nothing  was 
going  to  be  said  in  reply  to  our  friends,  no  one  could  contradict 
€0  sound  a  speech,  and  so  on.  When  I  discovered  this,  I  devoted 
all  my  energy  to  getting  us  admitted  to  the  meeting  of  the  Senate 
to  be  held  on  the  following  day.  For  a  long  time  I  turned  every 
stone  in  vain,  for  the  chief  men  of  the  Senate  said  it  could  not 
be  done,  inasmuch  as  the  Senate  had  voted  otherwise.  Then  I 
began  to  cease  my  efforts  and  to  plead  with  sighs  to  him  who 
heareth  the  groans  of  those  in  bondage  not  to  abandon  the  truth, 
but  to  come  to  the  defense  of  his  gospel,  which  he  had  willed  to 
have  us  preach.  At  length  on  the  ninth  the  citizens  assembled, 
and  loudly  vented  their  indignation  at  their  bishops  not  being 
admitted,  but  they  of  the  Senate  which  from  its  number  is  called 
the  Less  resisted  because  they  had  voted  otherwise  previously. 
The  Greater  Senate,  however,  compelled  them  against  their  will 
to  put  the  matter  to  vote,  and  it  was  decided  that  their  bishops 
should  be  present  and  hear  everything,  and  if  need  be  make 
answer.  Thus,  not,  as  Livy  says,'  did  the  greater  part  prevail 
over  the  better ;  for  here  both  the  greater  and  the  better  part 
prevailed.  And  this  I  have  allowed  myself  to  write,  not  for  the 
sake  of  laying  any  blame  upon  the  Lesser  Senate,  but  to  show 
what  plotting  and  underhand  action  can  accomplish.  For  what 
else  were  the  delegates  of  the  Bishop  of  Constance  after  but  to 
say  without  witnesses  whatever  came  into  their  mouths  before 
the  simple  minded  commons?  Thanks  be  to  God.  For  when  the 
delegates  were  brought  into  the  Senate,  we  bishops  of  Zurich  were 
also  admitted,  Henry  Engelhard,  LL.D.,  of  the  nunnery,  Rudolph 
Roschlin,  bishop  of  St.  Peter's,  and  I,  Huldreich  Zwingli.  *    Then 

*  Henry  Engelhard  had  been  people's  priest  at  the  cathedral  of  Our  Lady 
since  1496.  He  had  also  been  a  canon  of  the  Great  Minster,  but  in  1521 
resigned  so  that  Zwingli  might  be  appointed.  This  act  of  disinterestedness  shows 
what  a  fine  character  he  was.  He  remained  ever  one  of  Zwingli's  friends. 
Tie  died  in  1551,  a  very  old  man.  Rudolph  Roschlin,  people's  priest  at  St. 
Peter's,  was  very  slow  in  accepting  the  Reformation,  was  at  the  time  of  this 
episcopal  visit  an  old  man,  and  a  few  weeks  after  it  resigned  his  place  and  was 
succeeded  by  Zwingli's  bosom  friend,  Leo  Jud. 


12  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

when  they  had  been  given  permission  to  speak,  and  the  sufTragan 
had  extended  to  the  assembly  greeting  and  blessing  from  his  Most 
Illustrious  Leader  and  Bishop  (for  this  must  now  at  least  be  ad- 
mitted), he  began  with  that  wonderfully  sweet  voice  of  his,  than 
which  I  have  scarcely  ever  heard  one  sweeter  in  speech.  Indeed, 
if  his  heart  and  brain  were  as  good,  you  might  say  that  he  could  ex- 
cel Orpheus  and  Apollo  in  sweetness,  Demosthenes  and  the  Gracchi 
in  persuasive  power.  I  should  like  to  set  down  his  speech  in  its 
entirety,  but  I  cannot,  partly  because  he  spoke  in  an  involved 
and  jumbled  together  style,  without  order,  and  partly  because  so 
long  a  speech  could  not,  I  think,  be  remembered  even  by  a 
Porcius  Latro.  But  since  I  had  my  note-book  at  hand  and  took 
down  the  main  headings,  in  order  to  be  able  to  meet  and  answer 
them  more  fitly,  I  will  fiist  put  down  these  headings  and  then 
subjoin  what  I  said  in  reply  to  each  of  them. 

With  the  manner  of  a  consummate  tragedian  he  said  that 
(i)  certain  persons  were  teaching  new,  obnoxious  and  seditious 
doctrines  (wieder  wartig  und  aufrahrig  lehren,  in  German),  to 
wit:  that  (2)  no  human  prescriptions  and  no  ceremonials  ought 
to  be  regarded.  If  this  doctrine  prevailed,  it  would  come  to  pass 
that  not  only  the  laws  of  the  state  but  even  the  Christian  faith 
would  be  done  away  with,  although  (3)  ceremonies  were  a  sort 
of  manuductio  or  ''  leading  by  the  hand  "  to  the  virtues  (for  he 
was  pleased  "p  use  this  word  manuductio  even  before  people  who 
did  not  understand  Latin,  because,  no  doubt,  the  German  term 
eine  einleitung,  "  an  introduction,"  did  not  seem  to  him  strong 
enough  (or,  if  you  will,  fine  enough).  Ceremonials  were  in  fact, 
he  said,  a  source  of  virtue  (ein  ursprung),  though  he  afterwards 
had  the  boldness  to  deny  before  all  those  witnesses  that  he  used 
the  word  ;  (4)  they  were  also  teaching  that  Lent  ought  not  to  be 
kept,  for  certain  persons  in  this  city  had  ventured  to  withdraw 
from  other  Christians  and  from  the  Christian  Church,  though 
this  statement  also  he  afterwards  denied  with  as  much  shameless- 
ness  as  stubbornness.     My  lord  Brendlin  bore  witness  that  he 


THE    EPISCOPAL   VISITATION.  I3 

had  not  used  that  expression,  though  the  whole  Senate  still  bears 
witness  that  he  used  it.  So  persistently  do  these  people  fancy 
that  they  are  free  to  say  off-hand  whatever  they  please  and  to 
deny  off-hand  what  they  have  said,  almost  at  the  moment  of 
saying  it.  He  said  (5)  that  they  had  eaten  meat  in  Lent  to  the 
scandal  of  the  whole  republic  of  Christ;  though  (6)  this  was 
evidently  not  permitted  by  the  gospels,  they  yet  ventured  to 
declare  that  they  might  do  it  in  accordance  with  the  writings  of 
the  EvangeHsts  and  Apostles ;  they  had  violated  (7)  the  decrees 
of  the  Holy  Fathers  and  the  councils,  and  (8)  a  most  ancient 
custom  which  (9)  we  never  could  have  kept  so  long  if  it  had  not 
emanated  from  the  Holy  Spirit.  For  Gamaliel  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  had  said  :  ''  Let  them  alone  ;  for  if  this  work  is  of  God," 
etc.  Then  he  urged  the  Senate  (to)  to  remain  with  and  in  the 
Church,  for  outside  of  it  no  one  had  salvation.  For  (11)  the 
things  which  were  being  taught  so  wrongheadedly  were  being 
taught  without  grounds.  And  not  having  satisfied  himself  in  what 
he  had  said  before  about  ceremonials,  he  fell  (12)  to  speaking  of 
them  again,  saying  that  they  were  the  only  means  by  which  the 
humbler  Christians  were  brought  to  the  recognition  of  salvation, 
and  that  it  belonged  to  the  duties  of  the  people's  priests  (for 
that  is  the  way  bishops  and  preachers  are  named  now-a-days  by 
those  counterfeit  bishops,  to  keep  their  name  sacred)  to  teach 
the  simple-minded  populace  that  there  were  certain  symbols 
which  denoted  certain  things,  and  that  it  was  their  function  to 
explain  and  set  forth  the  meaning  and  value  thereof.  At  length, 
after  the  above  turn  in  his  speech,  he  began  to  discourse  (13) 
upon  grounds  of  offence,  not  unlearnedly,  I  confess,  only  I  wish 
that  he  had  cited  as  happily  the  things  against  himself  as  those  for 
him.  Lie  added  that  Christ  enjoined  with  as  much  emphasis  as 
he  put  upon  any  precept,  that  offences  be  avoided,  for  he  added 
that  most  clear  mark  of  indignation,  "  Woe  !"  "  Woe  to  the 
world  from  offences  !"  Going  back  also  to  Paul,  from  whose 
epistles  he  had  quoted  many  things  before  he  discoursed  upon 


14  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

"Woe,"  he  called  to  witness  (14)  that  in  order  not  to  offend 
the  Jews  he  had  suffered  Timothy  to  be  circumcised.  And  what 
he  ought  to  have  said  among  his  first  remarks  about  seditious 
teachings,  he  talked  on  after  everything  else,  saying  (15)  that 
no  one  ought  to  trust  his  own  ideas ;  for  that  even  Paul  had  been 
unwilling  to  depend  upon  his  own  notions,  and  had  gone  to 
Jerusalem  to  compare  his  gospel  with  the  Apostles,  etc.  And 
after  a  very  beautiful  peroration  to  his  remarks  he  rose,  and  was 
on  the  point  of  going  away  with  his  allies,  when  I  addressed 
them  in  the  following  terms : 

"  My  Lord  suffragan  "  (and  in  this  I  made  an  indiscreet  and 
ignorant  enough  blunder;  for  they  tell  me  I  should  have  said 
"  most  merciful  Lord,"  but  being  unskilled  in  polished  ways  I 
take  hold  like  a  clophopper)  "  and  fellow-ecclesiastics,"  I  said 
"  wait,  I  pray,  until  I  make  explanation  in  my  own  behalf."  For 
that  my  fellow-bishops  allowed  me  to  do.  To  this  he  said  :  "  It  has 
not  been  enjoined  upon  us  to  engage  in  discussion  with  any  one." 
"And  I,"  said  I,  "  have  no  intention  of  entering  into  discussion, 
but  what  I  have  thus  far  been  teaching  these  excellent  citizens  I 
would  willingly  and  gladly  set  forth  to  you  who  are  both  learned 
men  and  delegates  sent  here,  so  to  speak,  with  full  powers ;  that 
the  greater  faith  may  be  had  in  my  teachings  if  you  shall  have 
voted  them  right,  and  if  not,  that  the  opposite  may  take  place." 
"  We  have  said  nothing,"  said  he,  "  in  opposition  to  you,  and 
therefore  there  is  no  need  for  you  to  make  explanation."  But  I 
said  :  "  Though  you  have  refrained  from  mentioning  my  name, 
yet  all  the  force  and  power  of  your  words  were  aimed  and  hurled 
at  me.  For,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  were  dealing  with  me  in 
the  style  of  the  old  gladitorial  combats  between  Mirmillons  and 
Gauls,  wherein  the  Mirmillon  cried  :  "  It  is  not  you  I  am  aiming 
at,  Ciaul,  it  is  the  fish  I  am  aiming  at."  So  my  name  was  kept 
out  of  sight  and  not  mentioned,  in  order  that  most  serious 
charges,  if  it  please  the  gods,  might  be  developed  against  me, 
whose  name  is  Zwingli.     While  we  were  thus  contending  together, 


THE    EPISCOPAL   VlSltATION.  1 5 

M.  Roest,  President  of  the  Senate,  tried  by  entreaty  to  persuade 
the  men  of  Constance  to  listen,  to  which  entreaty  the  suffragan 
replied  that  he  knew  with  whom  he  should  have  to  deal  if  he 
listened.  Huldreich  Zwingli  was  too  violent  and  choleric  to  make 
any  duly  and  moderately  carried  on  discussion  possible  with  him. 
I  answered  :  "  What  wrong  have  I  ever  done  you?  And  what 
kind  of  a  way  of  doing  is  this,  to  worry  so  harshly  and  bitterly  a 
guiltless  man  who  has  done  his  duty  by  Christianity,  and  to  refuse 
to  hear  any  explanation?  I  have  always  felt  myself  bound  to 
hope,  unless  I  am  mistaken  (but  perhaps  I  am  mistaken),  that  if 
any  one  ever  came  forward  to  contradict  the  truth  and  teachings 
of  the  gospel,  it  would  come  to  pass  that  the  High  Prelate  of 
Constance  would  rush  to  its  aid  before  all  others  and  hear  the 
whole  case,  and  this  by  your  help  especially,  whom  he  has  even 
now  employed  as  delegates  because  of  your  preeminent  learning. 
For  what  would  ye  do  if  I  wanted  to  go  to  him  without  your 
knowledge?  If  I  feared  to  meet  you?  If  I  refused  to  have 
your  opinion  in  the  matter?  Now,  when  I  do  nothing  of  the 
kind,  but  ask  your  presence  in  order  to  give  an  account  of  my 
faith  and  teachings,  how  have  you  the  face  to  venture  to  refuse  it? 
It  could  not  have  failed  to  rouse  suspicion  if  I  had  allowed  you 
to  go  away,  even  though  you  desired  it ;  now  when  I  appeal  of 
my  own  accord  to  your  judgment  and  justice,  do  you  dare  to 
abandon  me?"  Then  said  they  :  "  Our  Reverend  Master  did  not 
wish  us  to  enter  into  a  dispute  with  any  one,  so  it  is  impossible 
for  us  to  hear  you.  If  you  wish  to  take  any  point  of  doctrine  to 
the  bishop  you  are  free  to  do  so;  if  you  need  anything  apprize 
him  of  it."  But  I  said :  "  I  beg  of  you  if  you  are  not  willing 
from  any  other  consideration  to  vouchsafe  me  this  favour,  yet 
grant  me  this  wish  for  the  sake  of  our  common  faith,  our  common 
baptism,  and  for  the  sake  of  Christ,  the  giver  of  life  and  salvation, 
and  if  you  may  not  listen  as  delegates,  you  still  may  as  Chris- 
tians." When  I  had  thus  adjured  them  the  citizens  began  to 
murmur  in  their  indignation,  so  that  at  last,  driven  by  the  urgent 


I  6  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

request  of  the  president  and  the  unworthiness  of  their  course, 
they  went  back  to  their  seats.  Thereupon  I  began  to  speak  in 
defence  of  the  teachings  of  Christ  to  the  best  of  my  abiUty,  and 
made  answer  to  their  main  heads  in  about  this  fashion : 

1.  My  lord  suffragan  has  stated  that  certain  persons  were 
teaching  seditious  and  obnoxious  doctrines,  but  I  cannot  be  per- 
suaded that  he  means  this  to  be  taken  of  me,  who  for  nearly  four 
years  now  have  been  preaching  the  gospel  of  Christ  and  the 
teachings  of  the  Apostles  with  so  much  energy.  And  yet  it 
savors  somewhat  of  this,  inasmuch  as  he  made  the  statement 
before  the  Senate.  For  what  concern  were  it  of  mine  if  such 
teachings  were  preached  elsewhere,  provided  they  were  not 
preached  at  Zurich?  Therefore,  since  it  is  not  likely  that  the 
suffragan  spoke  of  the  affairs  of  outsiders,  it  is  clear  that  his 
remarks  were  aimed  at  me.  However  much  they  disguise  it,  it 
is  evident  that  here  is  the  David  to  whom  this  Nathan  imputed- 
the  wrong.  But  as  to  the  gospel,  it  is  no  wonder  that  in  one 
place  or  another  there  should  be  differences  between  those  who 
cling  doggedly  to  ewd'/Mara,  that  is,  human  prescriptions,  and 
those  who  are  unfriendly  to  the  same.  For  Christ  prophesied 
most  clearly  that  this  would  come  to  pass,  saying :  "  I  came 
not  to  send  peace  on  earth,  but  a  sword.  For  I  am  come  to  set 
a  man  at  variance  against  his  father,  and  the  daughter  agains^ 
her  mother,  and  the  daughter-in-law  against  her  mother-in-law, 
and  it  shall  come  to  pass  that  a  man's  foes  shall  be  they  of  his 
own  household."  Yet  there  was  no  need  of  this  answer  either. 
For  Zurich  more  than  any  other  of  the  Swiss  cantons  is  in  peace 
and  quiet,  and  this  all  good  citizens  put  down  to  the  credit  of 
the  gospel. 

2.  As  to  the  reproach,  in  the  next  place,  that  it  is  taught  that 
no  human  prescriptions  nor  ceremonials  ought  to  be  kept,  I  will 
acknowledge  frankly  that  1  desire  to  see  a  fair  portion  of  the 
ceremonials  and  prescriptions  done  away  with,  because  the  things 
prescribed  are  in  great  part  such  as  also  Peter  in  the  Acts  says 


THE    EPISCOPAL    VISITATION.  1 7 

can  not  be  endured.  Nor  am  I  going  to  listen  to  those  who  say 
that  Peter  spoke  of  the  old  ceremonials  and  piesciiptions.  Be 
it  understood,  though,  that  if  I  should  grant  them  this  it  is  still 
clear  that  Peter  was  of  opinion  that  Christians  ought  to  be  free 
from  burdens  and  bitterness  of  the  kind.  But  if  Peter  depre- 
cated that  old  yoke  so  greatly,  which  was  yet  much  lighter  than 
that  which  we  bear  to-day,  what  think  ye  he  would  have  done  if 
there  had  been  question  of  a  heavier  one?  Now  that  the  old 
yoke  would  have  been  more  endurable  to  Christians  than  ours 
(to  say  nothing  for  the  nonce  of  the  decrees  of  the  pontiffs, 
which  are  much  more  numerous  and  onerous  than  the  commands 
of  Moses,)  is  shown  well  enough  by  the  excessive  observation  of 
fasts,  the  careful  selection  of  foods,  and  the  enforced  leisure  of 
feast  days.  For  how  trifling  will  the  fasts  of  the  Jews  become 
which  they  ordained  at  times  for  those  in  great  sorrow,  if  you 
compare  them  with  these  stated  forty  days'  fasts  of  ours,  institu- 
tions fit  for  serfs,  and  those  that  are  ordained  in  a  sort  of  unbroken 
and  continuous  row  in  honour  of  the  saints  !  Furthermore,  if 
you  compare  the  selection  of  foods,  its  observation  is  more  oner- 
ous among  the  Christians  than  among  the  Jews.  They  abstained 
from  certain  kinds  of  food,  but  not  at  a  fixed  period,  with  the 
exception  of  the  Passover.  We  abstain  from  numerous  kinds  and 
for  long  seasons.  And  in  the  enforced  leisure  of  feast  days  we 
surpass  the  Jews  very  greatly.  But  if  Peter  did  not  want  the 
Christians  worried  by  the  lighter  yoke  much  less  would  he 
approve  the  heavier.  I  denied,  however,  that  I  was  of  opinion 
that  no  human  prescriptions  at  all  ought  to  be  kept  or  enacted. 
For  who  would  not  joyfully  accept  what  was  decided  by  the 
concurrent  opinion  of  all  Christians?  But  on  the  other  hand, 
the  decrees  of  certain  most  unholy  spirits,  who  after  the  manner 
of  the  Pharisees  would  lay  unbearable  burdens  upon  the  necks  of 
men  and  not  touch  themselves  even  with  the  tip  of  their  fingers, 
were  an  abomination.  And  as  to  his  having  said,  with  a  view  to 
rouse  the  Senate  to  anger,  that  we  should  fail  to  obey  the  laws  of 


1 8  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

the  state,  I  said  this  was  not  the  spirit  of  Christ  or  of  the  Apos- 
tles. For  Christ  had  said  :  "  Render  unto  Caesar  the  things  that 
are  Cnesar's,"  etc.,  and  had  paid  the  tribute  or  tax.  Nay,  at  his 
birth  his  parents  reported  his  name  according  to  the  proclamation 
of  Caesar;  while  the  Apostles  taught  "Render  unto  all  their  due, 
tribute  to  whom  tribute  is  due,  etc.,  and  obey  them  who  are  set 
in  authority  over  you,  and  not  only  the  good,"  etc.  Hence  it 
was  evident  that  he  had  spoken  more  vigorously  than  truly,  as 
would  be  made  still  clearer  by  an  illustration.  For  all  the  peo- 
ples of  the  whole  world  had  obeyed  the  laws  most  rigorously, 
even  before  the  man  Christ  was  born.  Nay,  Christianity  was  the 
most  powerful  instrument  for  the  preservation  of  justice  in  general, 
and  the  faith  of  Christ  could  not  be  done  away  with  even  if  all 
ceremonials  were  done  away  with  altogether.  Nay,  ceremonials 
achieved  nothing  else  than  the  cheating  of  Christ  and  his  faithful 
followers  and  doing  away  with  the  teachings  of  the  Spirit,  calling 
men  away  from  the  unseen  to  the  material  things  of  this  world, 
but  this  could  not  be  described  and  explained  in  short  compass. 

3.  Then  I  showed  that  the  simple-minded  people  could  be  led 
to  the  recognition  of  the  truth  by  other  means  than  ceremonials, 
to  wit,  by  those  by  which  Christ  and  the  Apostles  had  led  them 
without  any  ceremonials  as  far  as  I  had  been  able  to  learn  through 
the  sacred  writings,  and  that  there  was  no  danger  that  the  people 
were  not  ca/)able  of  receiving  the  gospel,  which  he  who  believes 
can  understand.  They  can  believe,  therefore  they  can  also- 
understand.  Whatever  takes  place  here  is  done  by  the  inspira- 
tion of  God,  not  by  the  reasoning  of  man,  as  Christ  also  thanked 
the  Father,  saying  :  "  I  thank  thee,  O,  Father,  etc.,  because  thou 
hast  hid  these  things  from  the  wise  and  prudent,  and  hast 
revealed  them  unto  babes.  Even  so,  Father,  for  so  it  seemed 
good  in  thy  sight."  And  Paul  (i  Cor.  i)  says  that  "God  hath 
chosen  the  foolish  things  of  the  world  to  confound  the  wise." 

4.  I  had  nowhere  taught  that  Lent  ought  not  to  be  kept,  though 
I  could  wish  that  it  were  not  prescribed  so  imperiously,  but  were 


THE    EPISCOPAL   VISITATION.  1 9 

left  free  to  the  individual.  But  he  for  whom  Lent  was  not  enough 
^  might  fast  for  the  rest  of  the  year  also ;  there  would  not  be 
wanting  men  to  advise  fasting,  and  I  presaged  that  they  would 
be  likely  to  effect  more  than  those  who  thought  that  at  the  frown 
of  their  power  and  the  threat  of  excommunication,  everything 
would  fall  to  pieces  with  a  crash  as  at  the  frown  of  Jove. 

5.  Certain  persons,  and  they  by  no  means  bad  ones,  had  ven- 
tured to  eat  flesh,  and  they  were  not  tainted,  but  since  they  had 
not  been  forbidden  by  the  divine  law  to  eat  flesh,  they  seemed 
rather  to  have  eaten  it  in  witness  of  their  faith  than  to  any  one's 
reproach.  And  this  was  clear  from  the  fact  that  presently  when 
told  by  me  that  they  ought  to  take  into  account  the  possible  cause 
of  offence  they  stopped,  so  that  there  was  no  need  of  this  fine 
delegation,  inasmuch  as  the  evil  died  out  of  itself,  granting  that 
it  was  an  evil.  Still  I  wondered  exceedingly  that  I  had  been  a 
minister  of  the  gospel  in  the  diocese  of  Constance  for  fifteen 
years  aild  had  thus  far  never  known  of  the  men  of  Constance 
having  sent  anywhere  so  magnificent  a  delegation  to  investigate 
how  the  affairs  of  the  gospel  were  going  on,  but  now  when  they 
had  found  a  very  trifling  observance  not  broken  as  much  as  they 
seemed  to  wish,  they  filled  everything  with  their  lamentations, 
and  accused  the  people  of  Zurich  of  being  the  only  ones  who  had 
the  effrontery  to  meditate  withdrawing  from  the  Christian  com- 
munion. Yet  when  the  suffragan  denied  that  expression,  as  I 
have  said,  and  Brendlin  supported  his  denial,  though  the  whole 
Senate  cried  out  in  rebuttal,  I  allowed  their  denial  in  somewhat 
these  terms  :  Since  you  deny  the  expression,  show  that  it  escaped 
you  unawares  and  I  will  easily  pardon  it ;  as  far  as  I  am  con- 
cerned you  shall  be  free  to  correct  any  utterances  you  please. 
But  the  Republic  of  Christ  has  suffered  no  offence  and  no  disgrace 
if  some  few  persons  have  failed  to  keep  human  tradition. 

6.  And  I  showed  that  it  was  an  unsound  contention  that  the 
gospel  writings  nowhere  clearly  allowed  the  eating  of  flesh.  For 
Mark  (ch.  7)  speaks  in  this  fashion:  "  There  is  nothing  from 


20  Z WING! I    SELECTIONS. 

without  a  man  that  entering  into  him  can  defile  him."  Here  I 
showed  by  the  argument  from  the  preceding  (in  the  way  they 
manipulated  the  sacred  writings)  that  the  argument  of  the 
following  held  good  in  this  way  :  Therefore,  whatever  is  outside 
of  a  man  cannot  by  entering  into  him  defile  him.  Words  are 
signs  to  me.  A  general  negative  is  no  sign.  If  he  had  said 
"  no  food,"  he  would  have  left  out  the  category  of  drinks;  if  he 
had  said  "  no  drink,"  he  would  have  left  out  that  of  food. 
Therefore,  it  pleased  him  who  is  the  Truth  to  say  "  nothing." 
Then  he  added  "cannot  even  defile."  Hear!  The  Voice  of 
Truth  declares  it  cannot ;  man,  who  is  a  liar,  for  all  men  are  liars^ 
says  it  can.  Here  the  man  squirms  and  says  these  words  are  not 
so  clear,  and  must  be  interpreted  in  this  way,  but  the  preceding 
words  must  be  regarded  and  the  words  that  follow,  though  this 
is  what  follows  :  "  Do  ye  not  perceive  that  whatsoever  thing 
from  without  entereth  into  the  man  it  cannot  defile  him,  because 
it  entereth  not  into  his  heart,  but  into  the  belly,  and  goeth  out 
into  the  draught,  purging  all  meats?"  What  can  be  said  more 
clearly,  if  you  please,  even  though  you  regard  the  preceding  and 
the  following? 

7.  They  added  the  words  "  contrary  to  the  decrees  of  the 
Holy  Fathers  and  the  councils."  I  answered  that  Engelhard, 
the  ornament  of  our  city,  had  carefully  weighed  with  me  those  in 
which  oui/ friends  placed  greatest  confidence,  and  that  no  such 
asseveration  could  be  made  from  those  which  they  treated  as  a 
sacred  anchor.  For  the  question  was  not  whether  Lent  ought  to 
be  done  away  with,  but  whether  it  was  permissible  by  the  law  of 
Christ  to  eat  meat  at  that  time.  While  I  forbid  no  man's 
fasting,  I  leave  it  free  to  him. 

8.  'J'hey  had  also  added:  "and  contrary  to  very  ancient 
custom."  Here  I  frankly  granted  that  it  was  the  custom,  and 
not  a  bad  one.  But  if  it  were  the  custom,  why  was  a  proclama- 
tion added?  I  promised  that  I  would  certainly  see  to  it  that 
the  custom  should  not  be  wantonly  interrupted. 


THE    EPISCOPAL   VISITATION.  21 

9.  And  if  this  custom  (he  continued)  had  not  been  inspired 
'  by  the  divine  spirit  it  would  not  have  lasted  so  long,  in  accordance 

with  the  words  of  Gamahel.  I  answered  that  this  and  other 
things  which  were  not  from  the  mind  of  God  would  be  done  away 
in  their  own  good  time.  For  "  every  plant,"  says  Christ  in 
Matthew,  "  which  my  heavenly  Father  hath  not  planted  shall  be 
rooted  up."  But  selection  of  foods  neither  Christ  nor  the  Apos- 
tles had  prescribed.  Therefore  no  one  ought  to  be  surprised 
if  unhappy  mortals  are  turning  their  eyes  towards  freedom,  since 
Christ  in  his  loving  kindness  has  now  illumined  the  world  more 
brightly  with  his  gospel  by  a  sort  of  second  revelation. 

10.  After  this  the  weighty  speaker  made  his  turn  to  the  Senate, 
appeahng  to  them  to  stay  with  and  in  the  Church,  for  outside  of 
it  none  were  saved.  This  I  met  thus  :  "  Let  not  this  exhortation 
move  you,  most  excellent  citizens,  as  if  you  had  ever  abandoned 
the  Church  of  Christ.  For  I  am  persuaded  of  you  that  you  hold 
in  fresh  remembrance  what  is  said  in  the  narrative  of  Matthew, 
that  the  foundation  of  the  Church  is  that  rock  which  gave  his 
name  to  Peter  the  faithful  confessor.  No  one  lays  other  founda- 
tion than  this,  nor  can  do  so.  Nay,  in  every  nation  and  place, 
every  one  who  confesses  the  Lord  Jesus  with  his  tongue  and 
believes  in  his  heart  that  God  raised  him  from  the  dead  shall  be 
saved,  whether  he  be  among  the  Lidians  or  the  Scythians,  and 
it  is  fixed  beyond  controversy  that  outside  of  that  Church  none 
is  saved,  within  which  we  all  believe  ourselves  to  be  the  more 
firmly  as  we  glory  the  more  certainly  in  the  hope  of  the  glory  of 
the  sons  of  God."  Here  I  might  have  dragged  the  man  forth  and 
laid  bare  his  notion  of  the  Church,  but  I  preferred  to  spare  him, 
that  he  might  repent  at  length  of  having  said  before  the  whole 
Senate  that  I  was  too  rough  spoken  to  make  it  possible  to  discuss 
with  me.  When  he  had  thus  made  his  exhortation  I  began  to 
look  to  the  end  of  his  remarks,  but  things  turned  out  differently 
from  what  I  hoped.  For  he  turned  back  to  this  other  point  and 
said : 


la  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

11.  That  rubbish  (for  thus,  if  I  mistake  not,  that  crowd  call 
the  gospel  teaching)  was  taught  without  foundation  in  Scripture. 
Here-  again  I  fled  to  the  protection  of  the  words  of  Mark  vii.,  as 
a  sort  of  Achilles'  shield,  and  shot  forth  these  shafts  :  Do  you 
want  clearer  proofs  presented  to  you?  Is  not  Christ  worthy  of 
belief?  Or  Mark?  I  have  gathered  many  passages  together, 
but  I  abstain  from  giving  the  rest  now  in  order  not  to  nauseate 
the  Fathers.  Here  my  lord  Englehard  opportunely  drew  a  New 
Testament  from  his  pocket  and  bade  me  interpret  the  passage  of 
Paul's  Epistle  to  Timothy  i.  4.  1  took  the  book  and  translated 
the  passage  into  German,  and  it  is  wonderful  how  they  all  breathed 
a  sigh  of  relief,  recognizing  the  passage,  most  of  them,  from  the 
exposition  of  that  epistle  that  I  had  made  the  year  before.  So 
much  difference  does  it  make  at  what  point  things  are  said. 

12.  Immediately  leaving  these  points,  he  brought  the  cere- 
monials out  into  battle  line  again,  wounded  however,  and  I 
attempted  to  rout  them  completely  again  thus :  His  point  that 
it  was  the  duty  of  the  people's  priests  to  set  forth  the  meaning  of 
the  ceremonials  I  upset  in  this  way.  The  gospel  of  Christ  had 
been  committed  to  me  to  preach  assiduously ;  what  the  cere- 
monials indicated  those  would  set  forth  who  lived  by  them.  I 
admit  that  I  purposely,  though  quietly,  meant  to  touch  the  man's 
sore  point  in  this.     For  what  else  do  those  suburban  bishops  do 

I  but  stuff  their  purses  with  illusions  of  consecrating  things?     But 
i'\  if  any  master  of  ceremonials  ventured  to  preach  other  than  the 
■ '  truth   to   the   sheep  entrusted    to   me,  I  declared   I   would   not 
stand  it. 

13.  Now  what  he  had  said  about  offences  I  should  have 
approved  in  general,  if  all  his  words  had  not  seemed  to  point 
toward  keeping  those  who  were  weak  always  weak,  though  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  stronger,  as  those  fellows  wish  and  ought  to  be 
regarded,  TrpnaTinuftavea-daL^  that  is,  to  take  up  and  comfort  and 
help  the  weak,  that  they  may  also  be  made  strong.  Yet  this  one 
thing  I  added  :  Since  he  had  spoken  much  of  the  anxious  care  of 


THE    EPISCOPAL    VISITATION.  23 

the  High  Prelate  of  Constance  to  avoid  or  guard  against  offence 
to  the  Church,  had  he  no  exhortation  to  his  priests  at  last  after 
Christ's  fashion,  bidding  them  to  put  their  own  immunity  behind 
them  and  bear  the  general  burdens  with  the  rest  of  the  Christian 
brethren,  and  to  pay  tax  and  tribute?  For  Christ,  in  order  not 
to  give  ground  of  offence  to  those  who  exacted  the  tribute  money, 
paid  it  and  performed  a  miracle  besides,  but  it  could  not  be 
denied  that  all  the  people  in  every  nation  were  complaining 
because  the  priests  and  monks  and  nuns  were  supported  in  idle- 
ness, contributing  neither  labour  nor  money  for  the  uses  of  the 
State.  They  complained  bitterly  after  they  had  left  the  Senate 
that  this  had  been  brought  in  outside  the  subject,  as  they  say, 
but  it  seems  to  me  that  nothing  could"  have  been  said  more 
appropiiately  at  this  point,  when  they  were  talking  of  the  High 
Prelate  of  Constance  being  so  anxious  about  grounds  of  offence. 

14.  In  the  next  place,  though  I  was  aware  that  Paul  had  j 
suffered  Timothy  to  be  circumcised,  yet  I  maintained  that  he  | 
could  not  be  persuaded  by  any  means  to  allow  Titus  to  be  circum-  ''■ 
cised,  and  I  tried  to  give  the  reason  for  both  acts,  namely,  that  / 
with  Timothy,  while  Christianity  was  still  in  the  green  blade,  he  i 
had  suffered  the  Macedonians  to  be  circumcised  that  no  breach  ' 
of  the  peace  might  arise,  but  after  the  new  doctrine  had  grown  1 
somewhat  more  vigorous,  and  Paul  had  learned  by  his  perception  I 
of  this  that  Titus  could  be  saved  without  any  disturbance,  he  ji 
saved  him.  Here  I  put  forth  all  my  strength  to  persuade  the  | 
Senators  to  abide  by  the  ancient  custom  until  either  the  bonds  of  [ 
that  yoke  were  loosened  for  us  or  the  world  itself  consented 
together  more  clearly  for  the  taking  up  again  of  freedom. 

15.  Finally  I  said  that  those  could  rightfully  be  said  to  rely  on 
their  own  notions  and  ideas  who  struggled  against  the  accepted 
Scriptures  and  put  human  traditions  before  the  teachings  of 
heaven,  not  those  who  protected  themselves  by  no  other  weapons 
or  defences  than  the  sacred  writings,  for  the  former  trusted  in 
flesh  and  blood,  the  latter  in  the  truth  of  heaven  alone,  not  one 


24  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

jot  of  which  could  ever  pass  away.  Though  I  was  awaie  that 
Paul  had  compared  his  gospel  with  the  Apostles  finally,  I  also 
knew  that  he  did  not  do  it  for  fourteen  years.  And  though  I 
perceived  what  they  were  after  with  that  illustration,  their  side 
was  weakened  rather  than  propped  up  by  it.  For  I  had  insisted 
a  little  while  before  so  obstinately  that  they  should  be  present  at 
my  explanation  for  no  other  reason  than  that  they  might  see 
clearly  how  I  handled  the  sacred  writings ;  nay,  that  I  was  ready 
to  give  an  account  of  the  faith  that  was  in  me  before  the  dwellers 
in  heaven,  or  on  earth,  or  in  hell.  And  finally,  having  begged 
the  Senate  to  take  in  good  part  all  that  I  had  said,  I  stopped 
speaking,  except  that  when  the  suffragan  began  to  snap  out  some- 
thing more  and  to  drive  it  in  vigorously,  that  it  had  been  decreed 
by  the  Holy  Fathers  and  the  councils  that  meat  should  not  be 
eaten  in  Lent,  I  also  began  to  contend  more  recklessly  and  to 
deny  that  it  had  been  decreed  by  any  councils,  at  least  by  any 
general  ones.  At  last  when  he  had  finished  his  appendix  we 
adjourned  the  Senate. 

These,  dear  Brother  Erasmus,  are  the  wounds  I  received  and 
inflicted  in  the  assembly  of  the  Ecclesiastics  and  Senators ;  these 
the  means  with  which  I  ran  to  the  aid  of  the  feeble.  It  has  all 
been  written  down  off  hand  as  it  was  spoken,  for  the  suffragan 
had  brought  a  prepared  speech  with  him,  but  I  was  forced  to 
fight  and  defend  myself  as  I  stood.  If  I  have  said  anything 
more  briefl/or  more  fully  than  it  occurred,  I  think  this  should 
be  attributed  to  human  weakness,  which  hardly  recognizes  how 
little  power  it  has  in  remembering.  Yet  the  main  drift  of  the 
proceedings  in  general  I  have  touched  upon,  whether  in  the 
Senate  or  in  the  body  of  Ecclesiastics  or  in  private  discussion. 
For  the  evening  after  the  morning  they  had  spoken  before  the 
body  of  Ecclesiastics,  I  stumbled  upon  them  by  accident  and 
talked  much  with  them.  Thus  I  learned  just  where  their  sore 
point  was. 

Good  by,  and  if  you  write  to  my  friend  Oechsli,  greet  him  for 
me. 


PERMISSION   TO    M^RRY.  2$ 

II.  PETITION  OF  CERTAIN  PREACHERS  OF  SWITZER- 
LAND TO  THE  MOST  REVEREND  LORD  HUGO, 
BISHOP  OF  CONSTANCE,  THAT  HE  WILL  NOT  SUFFER 
HIMSELF  TO  BE  PERSUADED  TO  MAKE  ANY  PROC- 
LAMATION TO  THE  INJURY  OF  THE  GOSPEL,  NOR 
ENDURE  LONGER  THE  SCANDAL  OF  HARLOTRY, 
BUT  ALLOW  THE  PRESBYTERS  TO  MARRY  WIVES  OR 
AT  LEAST  WOULD  WINK  AT  THEIR  MARRIAGES.* 

To  the  Most  Reverend  Father  and  Lord  in  Christ,  Hugo  of 
Hohenlandenberg,  Bishop  of  Constance,  the  undersigned  offer 
obedient  greeting. 

Your  Excellency  will  perhaps  wonder,  Most  Reverend  Father, 
what  this  unusual  action  of  writing  a  letter  to  yourself  means, 
and  not  without  reason.  For  nature  has  ordained  that  the  un- 
expected should  create  not  only  wonder,  but  at  times  even  a 
feeling  of  dumfoundedness.  Yet  we  would  have  you  to  be 
entirely  free  and  undisturbed  in  regard  to  this  matter  which  we 
are  laying  before  you.  For  we  do  not  come  to  your  Excellency 
in  regard  to  anything  very  troublesome,  but  to  find  help.  Fot 
we  are  so  sure  that  you  are  both  a  most  pious  lord  and  a  most 
loving  father  that  there  is  nothing  we  do  not  promise  ourselves 

*  Zwingli's  Works,  iii.  17-25.  Translated  by  Mr.  Henry  Preble  from  the 
original  Latin. 

This  paper  explains  itself.  The  revelation  it  makes  is  curious.  The  signers 
had  doubtless  desire  to  preach  the  gospel  as  they  understood  it;  but  they  had 
a  much  greater  desire  to  be  legally  married.  They  must  have  known  that  theit 
bishop  had  no  authority  to  grant  their  requests.  It  should  be  remarked  that 
when  Zwingli  and  his  10  associates  drew  up  the  paper  here  given  they  were 
priests  in  good  and  regular  standing,  and  had  no  idea  of  leaving  the  church« 
Their  statements  are  to  be  believed.  This  frank,  not  to  say  naive,  petition 
stands  against  all  denials  of  the  unchastity  of  most  of  the  Swiss  clergy.  "Simul- 
taneously with  its  issuance  Zwingli  issued  another,  written  in  German  (see  his 
JVorks,  i.  30-51),  addressed  to  the  government  of  the  Confederacy,  which  also 
was  a  plea  for  the  free  course  of  the  gospel,  but  particularly  that  if  the  bishop 
should  allow  the  priests  to  marry  the  government  would  allow  it  and  protect 
the  married  priests. 

3 


26  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

from  you.  And  this  the  fact  itself  shows,  for  we  should  never 
have  ventured  to  write  to  your  Fatherhood  unless  we  had  had 
thorough  confidence  in  it.  We  desire,  therefore,  humbly  to  beg 
you  to  listen  kindly  to  what  we  are  going  to  disclose  a  little  later, 
to  hear  it  graciously,  and  to  take  it  in  good  part.  This  is  de- 
manded both  by  the  matter  itself  which  drives  us  to  this  appeal 
and  by  the  office  which  you  fill  as  a  loving  father.  The  matter 
itself,  to  come  to  it  at  last,  is  this  :  Your  Most  Reverend  Father- 
hood knows  how  for  a  long  time  the  heavenly  teachings  which 
God,  the  Creator  of  all  things,  willed  to  have  made  plain  unto 
the  poor  race  of  men  by  one  no  way  inferior  to  himself,  by  his 
Son,  in  all  things  his  equal,  have,  not  without  the  utmost  loss  to 
the  cause  of  salvation,  been  lying  hidden  through  the  ignorance, 
not  to  say  evil  intentions,  of  certain  persons,  and  how  rudely, 
when  he  had  determined  to  recall  and  renew  those  teachings  in 
•our  day  by  a  sort  of  second  revelation,  certain  persons  attack  or 
■defend  them.  For  all  the  efforts  of  these  defenders  are  aimed 
at  putting  an  end  to  the  whole  conflict  by  the  first  onset,  and  if 
they  fail  in  this  they  collapse  utterly,  but  the  attacking  party  are 
so  shamelessly  persistent  in  their  contention  that  though  thrown 
upon  their  backs  by  the  boss  of  the  shield  of  Holy  Writ  and 
pierced  by  the  sword  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  the  word  of  God, 
they  will  not  yield,  but  would  rather  contend  against  Christ  than 
abandon  their  pretensions,  until  they  be  compelled  to  abandon 
both  Christ  4nd  their  own  pretensions,  after  the  fashion  of  the 
Jews  of  old,  who  having  fought  against  the  living  Christ  till  they 
had  slain  him,  pursued  him  even  when  dead,  till  they  all  likewise 
perished  themselves.  And  though  we  do  not  by  any  means 
willingly  predict  this  same  ill-omened  end  for  the  present  mis- 
guided lot,  we  cannot  help  fearing  that  it  may  come  to  pass 
sometime,  and  for  that  we  are  not  without  reasons.  For  as  in 
the  old  days  the  Jews  cast  out  in  vain  from  the  synagogue  those 
who  believed  in  Christ  (for  the  faith  grew  more  and  more  each 
day),  so  in  these  days  of  ours,  if  any  continue  to  frighten  away 


PERMISSION    TO    MARRY.  27 

or  even  to  destroy  the  real  heralds  of  Christ,  they  will  meet  with 
the  same  result.  Therefore  must  the  words  of  Gamaliel  be 
pounded  into  them  often,  that  they  may  keep  their  hands  off  of 
those  who  bring  us  the  commands  of  heaven.  For  if  it  be  of 
God  it  cannot  be  destroyed,  for  it  were  folly  for  any  to  try  to 
fight  against  God ;  but  if  it  be  of  men  it  will  perish  of  itself. 
Meanwhile  most  watchful  care  should  be  taken  lest,  as  those  poor 
wretches  perished  miserably  in  their  doomed  city,  some  disaster 
overwhelm  us  unawares.  For  the  word  of  God  has  never  been 
disregarded  with  safety.  Therefore,  Most  Reverend  Father,  we 
beseech  you  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  not  to  join  those  who 
aim  at  putting  under  a  bushel,  nay,  at  extinguishing,  the  light 
that  came  into  the  world  to  illumine  all  men,  and  who  call  evil 
good  and  good  evil,  turning  sweet  into  bitter  and  light  into  dark- 
ness, but  rather  to  join  those  who  have  this  one  desire,  that  the 
whole  concourse  of  Christians  return  to  their  head,  which  is 
Christ,  and  form  one  body  in  him,  and,  having  received  the  spirit 
of  God,  recognize  the  blessings  bestowed  upon  them  by  God. 
And  this  we  see  is  by  no  means  the  case  with  those  who  promise 
themselves  some  sort  of  peace,  if  human  prescriptions  be  set 
before  Christ  even.  In  God  we  ought  to  be  made  one,  for  he 
himself  is  one.  In  man,  who  is  constantly  divided  against  him- 
self, how  is  it  possible  that  we  be  made  one?  Christ  prayed  to 
the  Father  to  make  us  one  in  him,  and  shall  man  dare  to  promise 
us  unity  in  him?  In  one  God,  in  one  faith,  in  one  baptism  we 
shall  certainly  be  made  one,  for  these  are  one.  In  some  one 
man,  when  there  are  so  many  laws  contradicting  each  other  and 
such  divergent  opinions,  so  far  are  we  from  being  made  one  that 
in  no  surer  way  can  we  be  led  astray  into  error  and  disagreement 
than  in  this.  Nay,  we  see  one  and  the  same  man  often  at  vari- 
ance with  himself  in  these  points.  Those  things  that  we  set  forth 
a  little  jvhile  ago  and  all  other  things  that  urge  us  to  unity, 
whence  can  they  be  more  clearly  and  purely  got  than  from  their 
very  fountain  head?     He  that  draweth  from  that  shall  abound 


a  8  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

in  the  water  that  springs  forth  into  everlasting  life.  But  the  well 
is  deep,  and  we  have  nothing  to  draw  with,  unless  he  who  is 
eager  to  be  drawn  brings  us  rope  and  bucket  and  windlass,  and 
after  the  manner  of  Moses  graciously  opens  a  well  for  our  feeble 
SDuls,  at  which  the  thirsty  sheep  may  drink  and  be  led  back  to 
the  heavenly  pastures,  which  surely  are  found  in  no  other  corner 
of  the  universe  than  in  the  Gospel.  For  what  other  fountain 
head  is  there  than  Christ  himself,  who  invites  us  to  himself  freely, 
saying :  "  If  any  one  thirsteth,  let  him  come  to  me  and  drink." 
For  he  desires  that  we  all  receive  of  his  abundance,  we  who  are 
in  need  of  all  things.  For  we  have  neither  silver  nor  gold  where- 
with to  satisfy  him,  but  he  urges  us  to  hasten  to  him  with  joyful- 
ness,  to  drink  freely.  Who  has  ever  shown  himself  so  liberal 
an  inn-keeper  among  men  as  to  suffer  his  wine  to  be  poured  out 
and  distributed  without  charge  save  Christ  alone,  who  bestows 
his  blessings  free  so  plentifully?  And  if  we  shall  not  seize  the 
favour  that  offers  itself  to  us  thus  freely,  what  hope  awaits  us? 
What  excuse,  pray,  shall  we  make?  Of  what  tortures  shall  we 
not  judge  ourselves  worthy  if  we  repel  from  us  him  who  desires 
to  become  so  near  a  friend  ?  We  are  aware  that  our  life  differs 
all  too  widely  from  the  pattern  of  the  Gospel,  but  is  the  Gospel 
on  that  account  to  be  abolished  and  done  away  with?  Ought 
we  not  rather  to  devote  ourselves  vigorously  to  correcting  our 
faults  according  to  its  standard  and  to  subduing  our  feebleness, 
since  it  is  l^e  one  thing,  could  we  only  believe  it,  from  the 
inspiration  of  which  salvation  will  come  to  us,  according  to  the  - 
command  of  Christ  when  he  sent  forth  his  Apostles  to  preach 
the  Gospel  with  these  words  :  "  Preach  the  Gospel  (not  your  own 
theories  or  decrees  or  the  regulations  which  some  chance  shall 
happen  to  dictate)  to  every  creature."  And  he  added : 
"  Whosoever  believeth  "  (when  the  Gospel  has  been  preached, 
of  course),  "  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved,"  and  on  the  other 
hand,  "  Whosoever  believeth  not,  shall  be  damned."  Since 
therefore,  as  we  have  said,  God,  as  of  old  he  used  to  warn  Israel 


PERMISSION    TO    MARRY.  29 

time  and  again  by  the  mouth  of  his  prophets,  now  deigns  in  our 
day  to  illumine  us  with  his  Gospel,  in  order  to  renew  his  covenant 
which  cannot  be  annulled,  we  have  thought  that  this  opportunity 
ought  by  no  means  to  be  neglected,  nay,  that  we  ought  to  strive 
with  unremitting  effort  that  as  many  as  possible  may  share  in  the 
glory  of  this  salvation.  And  inasmuch  as  meanwhile  a  report 
reaches  us  that  by  the  wickedness  of  certain  persons  your  heart 
has  been  so  hardened  that  you  mean  shortly  to  put  forth  a  proc- 
lamation warning  us  to  turn  aside  from  the  Gospel  if  in  any  part 
it  shall  prove  at  variance  with  human  tradition,  though  the  report 
hardly  deserves  credence  among  us,  yet  we  are  moved  somewhat, 
not  indeed  to  hesitate  in  slothful  fear,  but  to  pity  your  lot,  if 
things  are  as  they  are  commonly  reported,  that  this  pestiferous 
class  of  men,  who  confound  all  things  to  serve  their  own  purposes, 
has  been  able  to  extend  their  influence  even  to  yourself.  But 
heaven  forbid  !  For  we  place  such  high  hope  in  you  that  we 
doubt  not  we  shall  do  a  thing  acceptable  to  you  if  we  shall  show 
the  utmost  faithfulness  in  the  interests  of  the  Gospel.  For  we 
cannot  in  any  way  be  persuaded  that  you  desire  to  see  the  duty 
that  belongs  pecuHarly  to  your  office  neglected  and  abandoned. 
For  Christ  sent  you  not  to  baptize  nor  to  anoint,  but  to  preach 
the  gospel.  May  heaven  bless  our  undertaking !  We  have 
determined  to  spread  abroad  the  knowledge  of  the  Gospel  with 
uninterrupted  effort,  and  to  do  it  so  seasonably  that  none  shall 
have  a  right  to  complain  that  we  have  done  him  any  injury.  But 
if  we  shall  not  attain  a  prosperous  issue  in  this  according  to  the 
judgment  of  men,  there  is  no  cause  to  wonder.  For  it  is  a  rock 
of  offence  and  a  stumbling-block  and  a  sign  that  is  proving  false. 
For  he  came  unto  his  own,  and  his  own  received  him  not.  For  j 
these  reasons  it  is  becoming  that  your  Fatherhood  should  look 
with  favour  upon  our  vigorous  efforts,  which  though  perhaps 
uncommon  are  by  no  means  unconsidered,  and  that  you  should  I 
not  only  permit  but  help  and  advance  this  business,  which  isj 
Christ's,  not  ours.     That  will  be  above  all  things  honourable  and\ 


30  Z\VINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

worthy  of  a  bishop.  Nay  it  will  l^elong  to  you,  not  to  take  upon 
your  shoulders  some  part  merely  of  the  work  undertaken,  but, 
like  Moses,  to  lead  the  way  and  to  beat  back  or  destroy  the 
obstacles,  so  far  at  least  as  you  can ;  and  you  can  by  encourag- 
ing and  urging  men  to  this  task,  or,  if  that  is  too  much,  by 
approving  and  favouring  it,  and  removing  grounds  of  offence. 
For  among  the  things  that  threaten  most  to  harm  the  budding 
teachings  of  Christ  are  grounds  of  offence.  For  how,  by  the 
everlasting  God,  will  the  simple-minded  commons  believe  in  him 
who  even  whiile  he  preaches  the  Gospel  is  thought  by  them  to 
be  licentious  and  a  shameless  dog?  Can  any  thing  happen 
more  disastrous  to  our  sacred  calling?  We  beg  you,  therefore* 
to  show  yourself  as  indulgent  towards  the  second  part  of  our 
petition  as  we  believe  you  to  be.  We  think  that  your  most 
Reverend  Fatherhood  is  not  unaware  how  unsuccessfully  and 
scantily  the  prescriptions  in  regard  to  chastity  that  have  come 
down  to  our  times  from  our  predecessors  have  been  kept  by  the 
general  run  of  priests,  and  oh,  that  they  could  have  vouchsafed 
us  strength  to  keep  their  commands  as  easily  as  they  gave  them  ! 
Yet  God  willed  not  that  this  be  granted  to  man,  that  this  gift  of 
gods  and  angels  might  not  be  put  down  to  the  credit  of  man, 
but  of  God  only.  For  this  is  plainly  shown  by  the  words  of 
Christ  (Matthew  xix.  10-12)  when,  after  much  discussion  had 
taken  place  between  himself  and  the  Pharisees  with  regard  to 
marriage,  and^his  disciples  said  that,  if  the  case  were  such  as  the 
discussion  showed,  it  were  better  not  to  marry,  he  answered  that 
not  all  men  were  capable  of  chastity,  but  only  those  to  whom  it 
had  been  given,  wishing  to  show  that  it  was  a  gift  of  God,  that 
was  given  to  some  men  in  such  wise  that  they  might  recognize 
that  the  divine  goodness  and  not  their  own  strength  was  of  avail 
in  this  thing.  And  this  is  evidently  indicated  by  what  follows  a 
little  later,  when,  having  made  particular  mention  of  eunuchs,  he 
leaves  it  free  to  every  man  to  keep  or  not  to  keep  the  law  of 
chastity,  saying,  "  He  that  is  able  to  receive  it,  let  him  receive 


PERMISSION    TO    MARRY.  3 1 

it."  He  meant,  no  doubt,  that  they  to  whom  it  was  granted 
from  above  were  bound  to  keep  the  law.  For  otherwise  none 
could  hold  out  under  it.  We,  then,  having  tried  with  Httle 
enough  success  alas  !  to  obey  the  law  (for  the  disease  must  be 
boldly  disclosed  to  the  physician),  have  discovered  that  the  gift 
has  been  denied  unto  us,  and  we  have  meditated  long  within 
ourselves  how  we  might  remedy  our  ill-starred  attempts  at 
chastity.  And  turning  the  matter  over  on  all  sides,  we  found 
nothing  encouraging  or  propitious  until  we  began  to  chew  the 
cuds,  it  were,  like  the  cattle,  over  those  words  of  Christ  just 
quoted.  For  then  a  sort  of  loathing  of  ourselves  began  to  creep 
over  us  from  the  odour  of  it  until  we  began  to  be  disgusted  that 
through  careless  thinking  we  had  made  a  law  unto  ourselves  of 
that  which  Christ  had  left  free,  as  if  the  maintenance  of  chastity 
depended  upon  our  own  strength.  Then  presently  a  blush  of 
shame  overspread  our  faces,  just  as  Adam,  when  he  was  going  to 
be  like  the  gods,  found  first  nothing  but  his  own  nakedness,  then 
an  angry  God,  and  shortly  after  a  whole  cart-load  of  ills.  For 
who  would  not  repent  when  he  had  looked  upon  the  pitiable 
result  of  his  own  carelessness?  For  what  else  is  it,  by  the  ever- 
lasting God,  than  absolute  folly,  nay  even  shamelessness,  to  arro- 
gate to  one's  self  what  belongs  to  God  alone?  To  think  one's 
self  able  to  do  that  than  which  there  is  nothing  one  is  less  able 
to  do?  But  after  that  loathing  of  ourselves,  through  which  we 
recognized  at  once  our  rashness  and  our  weakness,  the  hope  of  a 
remedy  began  to  show  itself,  though  from  afar.  For  weighing 
more  carefully  Christ's  words  and  the  custom  of  our  predecessors 
in  this  matter,  we  found  that  the  whole  question  was  far  easier 
than  we  had  thought.  For  when  he  says,  "  All  men  cannot 
receive  this  saying,"  and  again,  "  He  that  is  able  to  receive  it, 
let  him  receive  it,"  he  prescribes  no  punishment  for  them  that 
cannot  receive  it.  Nay,  either  because  of  the  vastness  of  the 
thing  which  he  did  not  wish  enjoined  upon  each  and  all,  or  on 
account  of  our  weaknes,  which  he  knows  better  than  we  ourselves. 


32  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

he  did  not  want  this  thing  laid  up  against  us,  and  so  left  it  free. 
Therefore  our  souls  which  had  been  nigh  unto  despair  were 
mightily  refreshed  when  we  learned  those  who  were  unable  to 
receive  the  saying  were  threatened  with  no  punishment  by  him 
who  can  send  both  body  and  soul  into  hell.  But  the  fathers 
seemed  to  have  cast  an  anxions  eye  in  this  direction  too,  when 
they  showed  themselves  unwilling  to  enjoin  chastity  upon  all 
without  exception  or  to  require  a  vow  of  chastity  from  others — 
the  priests,  at  least,  and  even  shielded  human  weakness  with 
clever  words,  as  was  proper,  in  this  way : — When  the  sponsor 
who  was  accustomed  to  make  answer  for  all  who  were  to  be  con- 
firmed was  asked,  "Are  they  righteous,  these  'whom  you  present?" 
he  was  wont  to  answer :  "  They  are  righteous."  "Are  they 
well  trained?"  "They  are  well  trained,"  etc.  When,  however, 
they  came  to  chastity — "Are  they  chaste^"  he  answered,  "As  far 
as  human  frailty  allows."  Thus  it  appears  that  neither  our 
predecessors  nor  the  fathers  in  our  own  day  wanted  that  bound 
hard  and  fast  which  Christ  had  suffered  to  be  free,  lest  they 
might  smear  the  sweet  yoke  of  the  Lord  with  bitter  wormwood. 
Having,  I  say,  thus  balanced  these  considerations,  to  wit,  that 
we  are  held  to  the  maintenance  of  chastity  by  neither  divine  nor 
human  law,  we  considered  nevertheless  that  though  chastity  go 
free,  yet  animal  passion  ought  not  to  roam  promiscuously,  but  to 
be  bounded  by  rule  and  constancy,  and  forced  into  reasonable 
limits,  like  the^rest  of  the  course  of  our  life,  which  though  free 
becomes  wildness  and  confusion,  unless  it  be  restrained  by 
moderation,  that  we  sink  not  to  the  level  of  swine.  And  this  we 
see  the  Maker  of  all  things  willed  from  the  beginning  of  creation, 
when  he  fashioned  for  Adam  from  his  rib  one  woman  only  as  a 
helpmeet  and  not  a  group  or  crowd  of  women,  and  joined  her 
presently  by  so  firm  a  bond  that  a  man  leaves  father  and  mother 
sooner  than  his  wife,  for  the  two  unite  to  form  one  flesh. 
Furthermore,  if  we  run  through  the  whole  of  the  New  Testament 
we  find  nowhere  anything  that  favours  free    concubinage,    but 


PERMISSION    TO    MARRY.  33 

everything  in  approval  of  marriage.  Therefore  it  appears  to  us 
most  true  and  most  right  that  for  a  Christian  no  third  possibility 
'  besides  chastity  or  marriage  is  left,  and  that  he  should  live 
chastely  if  that  is  given  unto  him  from  above,  or  marry  a  wife  if 
he  be  on  fire  with  passion,  and  this  we  shall  show  more  clearly  in 
a  little  while  from  the  truly  sacred  writings.  Hence  we  beseech 
your  mercy,  wisdom  and  learning,  illustrious  Leader,  to  show 
yourself  the  first  to  lay  hold  upon  the  glory  of  taking  the  lead 
over  all  the  bishops  of  Germany  in  right  thinking  upon  Christi- 
anity, since  you  see  Christ  bestowing  especial  favour  upon  this 
age  of  ours  and  revealing  himself  more  clearly  than  for  several 
ages  since,  while  from  the  whole  great  body  of  bishops  scarcely 
one  or  two  thus  far  have  shown  themselves  fairly  on  the  side  of 
the  revivified  Christianity,  and  while  others  continue  to  thrust  ill- 
feigned  chastity  upon  the  unfortunate  general  body  of  our  fellow 
bishops,  do  you  suffer  those  who  are  consumed  with  passion  to 
marry  wives,  since  this,  as  has  been  shown,  will  be  lawful  accord- 
ing to  Christ  and  according  to  the  laws  of  men.  From  the  whole 
vast  crowd  we  are  the  first  to  venture  to  come  forward,  relying 
upon  your  gentleness,  and  to  implore  that  you  grant  us  this  thing, 
not,  as  we  think,  without  due  consideration.  For  when  on  one 
side  we  were  being  crushed  by  human  ordinances,  struggling  in 
vain  against  the  weakness  of  the  flesh  (for  the  law  stimulates  to 
sin  rather  than  restrains  it),  and  on  the  other.  Scripture  was 
smiling  upon  us  with  approval,  we  thought  it  no  wrong  to  bring 
forward  the  passages  on  which  we  rely,  that  it  m.ight  be  evident 
to  you  whether  we  treated  them  intelligently  or  not,  and  when  it 
appeared,  as  we  hoped,  that  we  had  employed  the  Scriptures 
righteously,  that  you  would  grant  what  we  ask  for  in  all  humility. 
The  first  passage  of  all  that  makes  us  free  and  that  we  trust  to 
as  to  a  sacred  anchor  is  Matthew  xix.  For  we  reason  thus  from 
it :  If  Christ  willed  that  chastity  be  free  to  us,  good-by  to  the 
man  who  tries  to  make  a  law  of  it.  The  demonstration  of  the 
second  is :  If  at  the  voice  of  God  Peter  feared  to  call  that  com- 


34  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

mon  which  God  had  purified,  we  may  boldly  declare  that  it  is 
not  right  for  any  man  to  declare  that  that  is  not  lawful  which 
God  has  suffered  to  be  lawful.  For  if  in  that  which  is  of  little 
account  God  was  unwilling  to  accept  the  judgment  of  Peter,  how 
much  less  in  a  matter  of  much  greater  moment  will  he  accept 
the  judgment  of  one  inferior  to  Peter?  Our  feeling  on  this  point 
is  clear  enough  from  what  has  gone  before,  when  we  add  that 
the  words  of  Christ  on  the  subject  we  are  speaking  of  are  the 
words  of  him  who  is  the  way  and  the  truth  and  the  life.  For  he 
says  in  another  place,  "  The  words  which  I  have  spoken  are 
spirit  and  life."  How  then  were  it  not  lawful  and  safe  to  trust 
to  them?  Nay,  we  shall  believe  accursed  rather  than  merely 
wicked  anything  that  shall  have  been  sought  out  to  contradict 
the  words  of  God.  They  are  spirit  and  life,  the  things  that  he 
has  said.  Therefore  what  we  say  is  flesh  and  death.  The 
second  passage  is  Paul  to  the  Corinthians  I.,  ch.  vii.  i  and  2  : 
"  It  is  good  for  a  man  not  to  touch  a  woman.  Nevertheless,  to 
avoid  fornication,  let  every  man  have  his  own  wife,  and  let  every 
woman  have  her  own  husband."  Here  first  we  concluded  that 
he  would  be  blest  to  whom  it  had  been  given  of  God  to  be  able 
to  do  without  a  wife.  And  while  we  willingly  yield  this  glory  to 
those  who  live  chastely,  we  are  grieved  that  it  has  been  denied 
unto  us,  though  we  bear  it  patiently  with  God's  help.  Next  as 
to  the  point  that  to  avoid  fornication,  every  man  should  have  his 
own  wife.  /He  who  said  "  every  man  "  made  exceptions  of 
none,  neither  priest  nor  monk  nor  layman.  Hence  it  is  clear,  as 
we  hinted  above,  that  for  a  Christian  there  is  nothing  between 
chastity  and  marriage.  He  must  either  live  chastely  or  marry  a " 
wife.  The  third  passage  is  in  the  same  chapter,  verse  9  :  "  If 
they  cannot  contain,  let  them  marr)' :  for  it  is  better  to  marry 
than  to  burn."  Therefore  if  one  cannot  contain  one's  self,  if 
one  burns,  let  him  marry.  We  have  been  so  on  fire  from  passion 
— with  shame  be  it  said  ! — that  we  have  done  many  things 
unseemly,  yet  whether  this  should  not  be  laid    upon    those    to 


PERMISSION    TO    MARRY.  35 

some  extent  who  have  forbidden  marriage  we  refrain  from  saying 
now,  thinking  it  enough  that  the  fire  of  passion  alone  (and  that 
so  frequent  and  violent  as  to  threaten  the  mind)  is  pronounced 
sufficient  reason  for  marriage.  The  fourth  passage  is  verse  25  in 
the  same  chapter :  ''  Now  concerning  virgins  I  have  no  com- 
mandment of  the  Lord  :  yet  I  give  my  judgment,"  etc.  Paul, 
the  teacher  of  the  nations,  the  chosen  instrument  of  God,  with 
whom  Christ  had  spoken  intimately  from  heaven  more  than 
once,  says  that  he  has  no  commandment  of  the  Lord  in  regard  to 
virginity,  and  has  an  unpurified  man  such  commandment? 
Then  too  Paul  had  said  much  of  the  value  of  virginity  and  its 
advantages,  and  much  of  the  trials  and  unhappiness  of  marriage, 
and  he  added,  verse  35,  "  And  this  I  speak  for  your  own  profit; 
not  that  I  may  cast  a  snare  upon  you,"  wishing,  though  he  had 
greatly  praised  the  state  of  virginity,  not  to  seem  of  opinion  that 
it  ought  to  be  commanded.  The  fifth  passage  is  i  Timothy  iii. 
I,  foil.  :  "  This  is  a  true  saying.  If  a  man  desire  the  office  of  a 
bishop,  he  desireth  a  good  work.  A  bishop  then  must  be  blame- 
less, the  husband  of  one  wife,"  etc.  And  a  little  later  he  adds 
"  having  his  children  in  subjection  with  all  gravity."  Here  we 
noted  that  though  it  is  a  thing  of  high  repute  to  be  a  bishop,  yet 
he  bids  a  bishop  have  a  wife,  whether  one  only  or  one  at  a  time 
we  will  not  now  discuss.  We  noted  also  that  the  name  bishop 
is  the  name  of  an  office,  not  one  of  arrogant  pride,  and  therefore 
we  had  no  fear  to  call  ourselves  also  bishops,  that  is,  watchers, 
because  the  other  terms  which  are  in  common  use  to-day  either 
seem  over-ambitious  or  are  foreign  words.  With  the  name  of 
watcher,  however,  how  can  any  one  be  puffed  up?  Can  he 
tliink  it  a  state  of  high  dignity  and  not  a  position  of  duty  when 
the  only  function  of  a  watcher  is  to  watch?  The  sixth  passage 
is  from  the  same  Paul  to  Titus  i,  5  and  6  :  "  For  this  cause  left 
I  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldest  set  in  order  the  things  that 
are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  in  every  city ;  if  any  be  blame- 
less, the  husband  of  one  wife,  having   faithful    children,"    etc. 


36  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

And  this  passage  is  as  like  unto  the  passage  above  as  one  pea  is 
like  another.  The  seventh  is  h'kewise  from  i  Timothy,  ch.  iv 
1-3  :  "  Now  the  Spirit  speaketh  expressly,  that  in  the  latter 
times  some  shall  depart  from  the  faith,  giving  heed  to  seducing 
spirits  and  doctrines  of  devils,  speaking  lies  in  hypocrisy,  having 
their  conscience  seared  with  a  hot  iron,  forbidding  to  marry,"  etc. 
Here  we  would  have  those  prick  up  their  ears  who  make  a  fine 
show  of  chastity  and  keep  it  ill ;  for  what  they  do  secretly  is 
wicked  even  to  think  of.  The  Spirit  speaking  in  Paul  says  that  in 
the  latter  days,  in  which  we  are  no  doubt  also  included,  it  shall 
come  to  pass  that  some  will  turn  away  from  the  faith  unto  their 
own  works  which  are  not  of  God.  Also  that  this  shall  happen  at 
the  instigation  of  evil  spirits  who  shall  speak  things  good  in 
5ippearance  only,  and  shall  commend  them  especially  by  the 
mouths  of  those  who  go  about  in  sheep's  clothing  raging  like 
wolves,  and  therefore  they  have  ever  been  singed  in  their  own 
eyes  and  condemned  by  their  own  judgment.  And  they  shall 
forbid  marriage.  Behold,  Most  Reverend  Father,  the  origin  of 
their  feigned  chastity  !  The  eighth  passage  is  ch.  xiii.  4  to  the 
Hebrews :  "  Marriage  is  honourable  in  all,  and  the  bed  unde- 
filed  ;  but  whoremongers  and  adulterers  God  will  judge."  This 
passage  seems  so  clearly  to  confirm  our  contention  that  we  think 
it  the  duty  of  bishops  (granted  that  they  be  watchers)  to  drive 
into  marriage  those  whom  they  have  detected  in  fornication. 
For  fornication  must  be  met,  because  besides  exposing  one  to 
judgment  it  also  offends  one's  neighbor. 

Influenced  then  by  these  passages  we  are  at  length  persuaded  that 
it  is  far  more  desirable  if  we  marry  wives,  that  Christ's  little  ones 
may  riot  be  offended,  than  if  with  bold  brow  we  continue  rioting  in 
fornication.  To  this  your  Highness  will  no  doubt  agree  when  you 
reflect  that  the  sin  of  him  who  offends  one  of  the  little  ones  of 
Christ  can  scarcely  be  atoned  for,  even  though  a  millstone  be 
hung  about  his  neck  and  he  be  cast  into  the  depths  of  the  sea. 
And  what,  pray,  is  a  stumbling  block  of  offence,  if  the  shameless 


PERMISSION   TO    MARRY.  37 

fornication  of  priests  is  not  a  stumbling  block  of  offence?  And 
let  your  Highness  not  deign  to  listen  to  those  who  snap  out  like 
this :  "  Behold,  Most  Reverend  Fathers,  the  religion  of  these 
men  !  What  else  are  they  after  than  turning  the  freedom  of 
Christ  into  the  lust  of  the  flesh,  according  to  the  judgmenr  of 
Paul  to  the  Galatians  5  and  of  Peter  i,  ch.  ii?"  For  to  make  no 
mention  now  of  how  the  cohabitation  of  marriage  is  regarded  by 
God,  although  we  do  not  deny  that  the  act  proceeds  distinctly 
from  the  flesh,  yet  we  know  that  it  is  far  from  harmful,  since 
Paul  says  (i  Corinthians  vii.  28)  :  "And  if  a  virgin  marry  she 
hath  not  sinned,"  because  God  no  doubt  looks  without  angei 
upon  this  thing  on  account  of  our  weakness,  or  rather  the  sin 
dwelling  in  us.  And  the  same  Paul  (Galatians  v.  19)  reckons  it 
not  among  the  works  of  the  flesh.  Yet  this  answer  is  not  neces- 
sary, since  it  is  clearly  evident  that  if  we  had  wished  to  indulge 
in  this  thing  for  pleasure's  sake,  we  should  never  have  allowed 
ourselves  to  be  tied  up  with  the  halter  of  wives  when  thus,  besides 
suffering  countless  arrogances,  we  are  cut  off  from  the  oppor- 
tunity of  making  good  the  unpleasantness  and  other  drawbacks 
of  a  long  married  life.  But  since  most  of  us  fill  the  office  of 
bishops,  in  which  above  all  things  there  should  be  no  room  for 
grounds  of  offence  (for  a  bishop  ought  to  be  blameless,  as  has 
been  made  clear  above),  we  have  all  tried  to  see  how  we  could 
cease  from  the  offence,  while  in  other  respects  (if  we  may  speak 
freely  without  boasting)  we  are  not  of  such  untutored  morals  as 
to  be  in  ill  repute  among  the  flock  entrusted  to  us  for  any  other 
failing  save  this  one  alone.  For  the  sake  of  Christ  the  Lord  of 
all  of  us,  therefore,  by  the  liberty  won  by  his  blood,  by  the 
fatherly  affection  which  you  owe  to  us,  by  your  pity  of  our  feeble 
souls,  by  the  wounds  of  our  consciences,  by  all  that  is  divine  and 
all  that  is  human,  we  beseech  you  mercifully  to  regard  our  peti- 
tion and  to  grant  that  which  was  thoughtlessly  built  up  be 
thoughtfully  torn  down,  lest  the  pile  constructed  not  in  accordance 
with  the  will  of  our  Heavenly  Father  fall  some  time  with  a  far 
more  destructive    crash.     You    see    what    the    world    threatens. 


38  Z\VINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

Therefore  your  Fatherhood  ought  to  regard  it  as  wise  foresight 
and  not  unreasonableness  that  we  come  to  petition  you.  For 
unless  wise  aid  be  applied  in  many  places  it  will  be  all  up  with 
the  whole  body  of  ecclesiastics.  And  please  do  not  refer  us  to 
the  decrees  of  the  predecessors  of  your  Fatherhood.  For  you 
see  how  they  fail  to  meet  the  case,  and  delay  in  the  hope  that 
though  we  have  been  first  beaten  with  rods  we  can  then  presently 
endure  the  sting  of  scorpions.  Our  weakness  must  be  indulged, 
nay,  something  must  be  ventured  in  this  matter.  O  happy  the 
invincible  race  of  Hohenlandenberg,  if  you  shall  be  the  first  of 
all  the  bishops  in  Germany  to  apply  healing  to  our  wounds  and 
restore  us  to  health  !  For  what  historian  will  ever  pass  over  the 
achievement  unmentioned?  What  scholar  will  not  trumpet  it 
abroad?  What  poet  will  not  sing  it  to  coming  generations? 
What  embalming  will  not  protect  it  from  decay  and  destruction? 
The  door  of  well  doing  is  surely  open  before  you.  You  have  only 
to  take  care  lest  you  do  not  hold  your  hands  firmly  clasped,  and 
so  let  the  offered  opportunity  slip  through  them.  For  we  pre- 
sage that  things  are  going  to  put  on  a  new  face  whether  we  will 
or  no,  and  when  this  happens  we  shall  lament  in  vain  having 
neglected  the  opportunity  of  winning  glory.  We  have  on  the 
side  of  our  request  that  Creator  who  made  the  first  human  beings 
male  and  female ;  we  have  the  practice  of  the  Old  Testament, 
which  is  much  more  strict  than  the  New,  under  which,  however, 
even  the  highest  priests  took  upon  their  necks  the  gentle  yoke  of 
matrimony  ;  we  have  Chiist,  who  makes  chastity  free,  nay,  bids  us 
marry,  that  his  little  children  may  not  be  offended,  and  our  petition 
meets  with  loud  approval  on  all  sides.  Nay,  even  Paul,  speaking 
with  the  spirit  of  God,  enjoins  marriage.  All  the  company  of  the 
pious  and  judicious  are  with  us.  If  you  disregard  all  this  [we 
know  not  how  you  can  embrace  your  race  with  affection,  for  you 
will  surpass  their  brave  deeds,  and  win  more  than  their  laurels 
and  statues,  if  you  only  grant  us  this  favour.  If,  however,  you 
cannot  possibly  be  persuaded  to  grant  it,  we  beseech  you  at  least 


PERMISSION    TO    MARRY.  39 

not  to  forbid  it,  according  to  the  suggestion  of  another  than  our- ! 
selves.  For  we  think  you  are  brave  enough  to  do  right  without! 
fear  of  those  who  can  even  slay  the  body.  And  in  fact  you  will', 
have  to  refrain  at  least  from  interfering.  For  there  is  a  report 
that  most  of  the  ecclesiastics  have  already  chosen  wives,  not 
only  among  our  Swiss,  but  among  all  peoples  everywhere,  and  to  | 
put  this  down  will  certainly  be  not  only  beyond  your  strength  but 
beyond  that  of  one  far  more  mighty,  if  you  will  pardon  our  say- 
ing so.  Accordingly,  scorn  us  not  as  of  little  account ;  even  a 
rustic  often  speaks  very  much  to  the  point.  And  though  we  be 
but  little  children,  we  are  yet  Christ's,  and  far  from  scorning  us, 
you  may  confidently  trust  that  salvation  will  be  yours  if  you 
receive  us.  As  to  ourselves,  we  shall  never  cease  to  sing  your 
praises  if  you  but  show  yourself  a  father  to  us,  and  shall  render 
you  willing  and  glad  obedience.  Grant  a  gift  to  your  children, 
who  are  so  obedient  that  they  come  to  you  before  all  things,  and 
so  trusting  that  in  this  matter,  however  difficult  it  is  thought  to 
be,  they  have  ventured  to  appeal  to  you  only.  The  Most  High 
God  long  preserve  your  Excellency  in  prosperity  and  in  the 
knowledge  of  God  !  We  pray  with  all  humihty  that  you  will 
take  all  we  have  said  in  a  spirit  of  justice  and  kindness. 
Einsiedeln,  Switzerland,  July  2d,  1322. 
Your  Most  Reverend  Fatherhood's  most  obedient  servants, 

Balthaser  Frachsel, 
George  Stahl, 
Verner  Steiner, 
Leo  Jud, 

Erasmus  Fabricius, 
Simon  Stumpf, 
JoDoc  Kilchmeyer, 

HULDREICH  MtJLLER, 

Caspar  Megander, 
John  Faber, 
huldreicpi  zwingli. 


r 


40  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

III.  ACTS  OF  THE  CONVENTION  HELD  IN  THE  PRAISE- 
WORTHY CITY  OF  ZURICH  ON  THE  29TH  DAY  OF 
JANUARY,  ON  ACCOUNT  OF  THE  HOLY  GOSPEL- 
BEING  A  DISPUTATION  BETWEEN  THE  DIGNIFIED 
AND  HONORABLE  REPRESENTATIVE  FROM  CON- 
STANCE AND  HULDRYCH  ZWINGLI,  PREACHER  OF 
THE  GOSPEL  OF  CHRIST,  TOGETHER  WITH  THE 
COMMON  CLERGY  OF  THE  WHOLE  TERRITORY  OF 
THE  AFORESAID  CITY  OF  ZURICH,  HELD  BEFORE 
THE  ASSEMBLED  COUNCIL  IN  THE  YEAR  1523.* 

*  JVorks,  i.  1 14-168.  Translated  from  the  Zurich  German  by  Lawrence  A. 
McLouth,  Professor  of  German,  New  York  University.  The  matter  between 
brackets  is  that  given  in  the  IVorks,  i.  158  sqq.,  as  addenda,  but  here  inserted 
in  proper  place. 

The  Protestant  Reformation  in  German  Switzerland,  as  for  the  most  part  in 
Germany  and  England,  was  largely  dependent  upon  the  good  will  of  princes 
and  other  rulers,  who  joined  it  for  political  ends.  No  one  can  gainsay  the 
great  advantage  of  their  support.  So  in  Zurich  Zwingli  endeavored  to  win 
over  to  his  side  the  members  of  the  City  Council,  rightly  arguing  that  if  suc- 
cessful he  would  be  able  to  preach  the  Reformation  through  the  canton,  no  mat- 
ter what  might  be  the  opposition.  He  made  his  appeal  to  the  magistracy  to 
be  allowed  to  hold  a  public  debate,  at  which  they  should  sit  as  judges,  and 
give  the  \nctor)'  to  that  side  which  presented  the  stronger  arguments.  He 
looked  forward  with  great  conffdence  to  such  a  public  debate,  for  which  he 
had  prepared  the  way  by  his  preaching  and  writing  and  talking  ever  since  he 
came  to  Zurich  in  December,  15 18.  The  City  Council  took  up  the  idea,  and 
were  perhaps  flattered  by  the  position  they  would  take  in  this  debate.  They 
issued  the  invitations  to  the  people  of  the  canton  and  city  of  Zurich  and  to  the 
bishops  of  Constance  and  of  the  adjoining  dioceses.  Zwingli  prepared  and  had 
printed  67  Articles  as  a  programme  for  the  debate,  and  looked  forward  with 
great  eagerness  to  the  time  set,  which  was  the  23d  of  Januar)',  1523. 

On  that  eventful  day  six  hundred  persons — priests  and  laymen  of  the  canton 
of  Zurich,  along  with  a  few  delegates  from  the  bishop  of  Constance  and  some 
others — met  in  the  Town  Hall  and  held  the  debate,  which  is  preserved  to  us 
by  Erhart  Hegenwald,  a  schoolmaster  in  Zurich,  who  informs  us  that  he  wrote 
it  from  memory  immediately  after  hearing  it.  His  account  was  edited  by 
Zwingli  and  published  in  Zurich.  John  Faber  (or  Fabri),  Vicar  General  of 
the  diocese  of  Constance,  one  of  the  ablest  disputants  on  the  Roman  Church 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  4 1 

To  the  worthy  ecclesiastical  Lord  and  Father  Sir  John  Jacob 
Russinger,*  Abbot  at  Pfabers,  to  His  gracious  Lord  Chamberlain 
Master  Erhart  Hegenwald  f  offers  his  willing  service  and  wishes 
peace  in  Christ. 

Worthy  ecclesiastical  Lord  and  Father :  I  understand  how 
your  dignity  and  grace  is  inclined  to  read  and  further  the  Gospel 
doctrine  and  truth  of  God  from  Christian  feeling,  which  fact  I 
conclude  among    other  things  from  the  following :    That  Your 

side,  bore  the  brunt  of  the  attacks  upon  that  church.  Zwingli  was  the  princi- 
pal speaker  on  the  other  side.  Fabri  also  published  his  account  of  the  debate. 
*'  Ein  warlich  underrichtung  wie  es  zie  Zurich  bey  de  ZwingHn  uff  den  einen  und 
zwentzigsten  tag  des  monats  Januarii  rest  verschine  ergangen  sey."  (Leipzig? 
1523.)  In  it,  naturally,  he  appeared  to  greater  advantage  than  in  Zwingli's  ac- 
count, but  it  seems  to  have  given  offence  to  an  enthusiastic  portion  of  the  audi- 
ence, and  some  of  these  young  men  thought  they  had  a  good  opportunity  to  bring 
out  a  satire  in  the  interests  of  the  new  faith,  and  so  they  concocted  a  book 
which  was  called  "The  Vulture  Plucked."  "Das  gyren  rupffen.  Nalt  inn 
wie  Johann  Schmidt  Vicarge  ze  Costentz  mit  dem  biichle  darinn  er  verheiszt 
ein  ware  bericht  wie  es  uff  den  29  tag  jenner  M.D.xxiij.  ze  Ziirich  gangen  sye 
sich  iibersehe  hat.  1st  voll  schimpff  unud  ernestes."  This  was  a  gross  attack 
upon  Fabri,  and  he  was  very  indignant  and  appealed  to  the  city  authorities  of 
Zurich  to  bring  the  offenders  to  book,  but  the  city  authorities  regarded  the 
whole  affair  as  a  kind  of  joke  and  took  no  action  in  the  matter.  The  three 
accounts  of  this  important  debate  supplemented  one  another;  the  one  which 
may  be  said  to  be  authentic  is  here  translated,  the  second  is  somewhat  colored 
in  favor  of  the  Roman  Church,  and  the  third,  which  contains  a  good  deal  of 
truth,  along  with  more  or  less  deliberate  falsehood,  have  been  properly  drawn 
upon  by  the  editors  of  Zwingli's  works,  and  the  corrections  and  additions  they 
have  made  from  the  last  two  accounts  are  here  incorporated. 

The  result  of  the  debate  was  the  enthusiastic  approval  of  Zwingli's  teachings, 
and  an  order  from  the  authorities  not  only  to  continue  their  presentation,  but 
enjoining  such  teaching  upon  all  the  priests  of  the  canton.  Thus  this  debate, 
which  is  known  as  the  First  Disputation,  is  of  great  historical  interest  as  mark- 
ing the  official  beginning  of  the  Reformation  in  German  Switzerland. 

*  He  was  one  of  Zwingli's  friends  and  correspondents,  and  active  in  the 
cause  of  the  Reformation,  but  returned  to  the  Roman  Church  after  Zwingli's 
death. 

t  He  was  a  school  teacher  in  Zurich. 
4 


42  ,  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

Grace  undertook  to  come  to  the  meeting  upon  the  day  appointed 
by  the  burgomaster  and  the  Council  of  the  city  of  Zurich  con- 
cerning the  dissension  and  trouble  which  had  arisen  in  the  city 
on  account  of  doctrines  or  sermons,  but  from  business  reasons 
and  other  accidental  causes  you  were  detained  and  hindered 
from  attending.  And  although  in  addition  to  all  the  clergymen, 
preachers  and  priests  that  have  livings  in  the  city  of  Zurich  and 
its  territories  there  w-ere  invited  and  summoned  to  this  praise- 
worthy meeting  also  many  other  foreign  nobility  and  common 
people,  prelates,  doctors,  masters,  both  secular  and  ecclesiastical 
lords,  likewise  the  praiseworthy  representative  from  Constance, 
when  these  had  appeared  at  Zurich  before  the  Council  in  session 
certain  enemies  of  the  Gospel  truth  (as  I  hear)  ridiculed  the 
matter,  announcing  and  saying  that  a  tinker's  day  was  being  held 
at  Zurich,  and  that  nothing  but  tinkers  were  attending.  These 
things  have  influenced  and  caused  me  to  describe  all  the  actions, 
speeches  either  for  or  against,  which  took  place  in  such  praise- 
worthy assembly  of  learned,  honest  and  pious  men,  both  eccle- 
siastical and  secular,  so  that  every  one  might  see  and  know 
whether  such  action  taken  and  speeches  made  were  by  tinkers 
rand  pan-menders,  also  whether  the  opposing  party  (which  has 
asserted  that  the  matter  is  known  abroad)  tells  the  truth  or  lies. 
For  I  was  there  myself  and  sat  with  them,  heard  and  understood 
and  remembered  all  that  was  said  there,  and  after  that  I  wrote 
it  down  in  my  home,  questioned  and  examined  others  who  had 
been  present  at  the  meeting  as  to  the  cases  in  which  I  thought  I 
might  not  have  understood  correctly.  With  the  true  knowledge 
and  witness  of  all  those  who  were  there  and  took  part,  about  six 
hundred  or  more,  I  may  assert  that  I  have  written  down  not  more 
nor  less  nor  different  words  (as  far  as  the  content  is  concerned) 
than  were  spoken  in  the  assembly.  I  write  and  send  this  to 
Your  Grace,  and  beg  Your  Grace  to  accept  it  with  good  will  and 
favor  as  a  service.  I  also  urge  as  a  fellow  brother  in  Christ 
Your  Grace  to  remain  in  the  future  as  in  the  past  steadfastly  by 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  43 

the  Gospel  truth,  to  practice  and  read  industriously  in  the  Gospel 
and  St.  Paul  and  other  Holy  Scriptures  as  Your  Grace  has  the 
reputation  of  doing,  also  to  live  in  Christian  conformity  with  the 
same  according  to  your  full  power ;  to  send  such  reports  of  action 
at  Zurich  to  the  others  who  are  related  to  Your  Grace  in  friend- 
ship or  otherwise  in  Christian  society,  as  for  instance,  the  worthy 
and  ecclesiastical  Lord,  etc.,  Abbot  at  Disentis,*  to  be  read,  so 
that  the  truth  may  be  known,  the  Gospel  advanced,  Christian 
love  increased,  men  fed  with  the  word  of  God,  our  will  and 
spirit  may  remain  united  with  Christ  through  His  word  in  peace, 
joy  and  harmony  here  for  the  time  being  and  there  forever. 
Amen. 

Given  in  the  praiseworthy  city  of  Zurich  the  3d  day  of  the 
month  of  March,  in  the  year  1523. 

In  order  that  every  one  may  understand  the  matter  better  I 
have  prefixed  and  written  down  the  mandate  of  those  of  Zurich, 
which  mandate  was  sent  out  into  all  the  territory  and  depend- 
encies of  the  city  beforehand  as  an  argument  as  to  the  causes 
for  the  above-mentioned  meeting : 

We,  the  burgomaster,  the  Council  and  the  Great  Council, 
which  they  call  the  two  hundred  of  the  city  of  Zurich,  announce 
to  each  and  every  priest,  preacher,  minister  and  clergyman  who 
has  a  living  and  residence  in  our  cities,  counties,  principalities, 
high  and  low  courts  and  territories,  our  greeting,  favorable  and 
affectionate  will,  and  would  have  you  know  that  now  for  consider- 
able time  much  dissension  and  trouble  have  arisen  between  those 
who  preach  from  the  pulpit  the  word  of  God  to  the  common 
people,  some  believing  that  they  have  preached  the  Gospel  faith- 
fully and  wholly,  whereas  others  blame  them  as  though  they  had 
not  acted  skillfully  or  properly.  On  the  other  hand  the  others 
call  them  sources  of  evil,  deceivers  and  sometimes  heretics ;  but 
to  each  one  desiring  it  these  offer  to  give  account  and  reckoning 
about  this  everywhere  with  the  aid  of  God's  Scriptures  to  the 

*  Andreas  von  Valara,  who  had  beea  abbot  since  15 12. 


44  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

best  of  their  ability  for  the  sake  of  the  honor  of  God,  peace 
and  Christian  unity.  So  this  is  our  command,  will  and  desire, 
that  you  preachers,  priests,  clergymen,  all  together  and  each 
one  separately,  if  any  especial  priests  desire  to  speak  about 
this,  having  livings  in  our  city  of  Zurich  or  outside  in  our  terri- 
tories, or  if  any  desire  to  blame  the  opposing  party  or  to  instruct 
them  otherwise,  shall  appear  on  the  day  after  Emperor  Charles' 
Day,  the  29th  day  of  the  month  of  January,  at  the  early  time  of 
the  Council,  in  our  city  of  Zurich,  before  us  in  our  town  hall, 
and  shall  announce  in  German,  by  the  help  of  true  divine  Scrip- 
ture, the  matters  which  you  oppose.  When  we,  with  the  careful 
assistance  of  certain  scholars,  have  paid  careful  attention  to  the 
matters,  as  seems  best  to  us,  and  after  investigations  are  made 
with  the  help  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  and  the  truth,  we  will  send 
each  one  home  with  a  command  either  to  continue  or  to  desist. 
After  this  no  one  shall  continue  to  preach  from  the  pulpit  what- 
ever seems  good  to  him  without  foundation  in  the  divine  Scrip- 
tures. We  shall  also  report  such  matters  to  our  gracious  Lord  of 
Constance,  so  that  His  Grace  or  His  representative,  if  He  so 
desire,  may  also  be  present.  But  if  any  one  in  the  future  opposes 
this,  and  does  not  base  his  opposition  upon  the  true  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, with  him  we  shall  proceed  further  according  to  our  knowl- 
edge in  a  way  from  which  we  would  gladly  be  relieved.  We  also 
sincerely  hope  that  God  Almighty  will  give  gracious  light  to  those 
who  earnestly  seek  the  light  of  truth,  and  that  we  may  in  the 
future  walk  in  that  light  as  sons  of  the  light. 

Given  and  preserved  under  the  imprinted  seal  of  the  city  on 
Saturday  after  the  Circumcision  of  Christ  and  after  his  birth  in 
the  twenty- third  year  of  the  lesser  reckoning.     [Jan.  3,  1522.] 

Now  when  all  of  the  priests,  ministers  and  clerg}'men  in  the 
territories  of  Zurich  obediently  appeared  at  the  hour  and  time 
announced  there  were  in  the  Great  Council  room  at  Zurich  more 
than  six  hundred  assembled,  counting  the  local  and  foreign 
representatives,   together  with    the    praiseworthy    representation 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  45 

from  Constance,  to  which  an  invitation  to  the  same  had  been 
sent  from  Zurich,  and  when  everybody  had  found  a  seat  at  the 
early  time  of  the  Council  the  burgomaster  of  Zurich  began  to 
speak  as  follows : 

Very  learned,  noble,  steadfast,  honorable,  wise,  ecclesiastical 
Lords  and  Friends  :  For  some  time  in  my  Lords'  city  of  Zurich 
and  her  territories  dissensions  and  quarrels  have  arisen  on  account 
of  certain  sermons  and  teachings  delivered  to  the  people  from 
the  pulpit  by  Master  Ulrich  Zwingli,  our  preacher  here  at  Zurich, 
wherefore  he  has  been  attacked  and  blamed  as  a  deceiver  by  some 
and  by  others  as  a  heretic.  Wherefore  it  has  come  about  that 
not  only  in  our  city  of  Zurich,  but  also  everywhere  else  in  the 
land  in  my  Lords'  territories  such  dissensions  have  increased 
among  the  clergy,  and  also  the  laity,  that  daily  complaints  of  the 
same  come  before  my  Lords,  and  the  angry  words  and  quarrel- 
ing do  not  seem  likely  to  come  to  an  end.  And  so  Master 
Ulrich  Zwingli  has  frequently  offered  to  give  the  causes  and 
reasons  for  his  sermons  and  doctrines  preached  here  in  the  pub- 
lic pulpit  so  often  in  Zurich  in  case  a  public  discussion  before  all 
the  clergy  and  the  laity  were  granted  him.  At  this  offer  of 
Master  Ulrich  the  honorable  Council  at  Zurich,  desiring  to  stop 
the  disturbance  and  dissension,  has  granted  him  permission  to 
hold  a  public  discussion  in  the  German  language  before  the  Great 
Council  at  Zurich,  which  they  call  the  two  hundred,  to  which 
the  honorable  and  wise  Council  has  summoned  all  of  you  priests 
and  ministers  from  her  territories.  It  also  requested  the  worthy 
Lord  and  Prince,  etc..  Bishop  of  Constance,  to  send  his  repre- 
sentative to  this  meeting,  for  which  favor  the  honorable  Council 
of  Zurich  expresses  especial  thanks  to  him.  Therefore  if  there 
is  any  one  here  who  may  feel  any  displeasure  or  doubt  in  Master 
Ulrich's  sermons  or  doctrines  preached  here  at  Zurich  in  the 
pulpit,  or  if  any  one  desires  to  say  anything  or  knows  anything  to 
say  in  the  matter  to  the  effect  that  such  sermons  and  teachings 
are  not  true,  but  misleading  or  heretical,  he  can  prove  the  truth 


46  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

of  the  same  before  my  Ix)rds,  the  often  mentioned  Master  Ulrich, 
and  show  him  at  once  his  error  by  means  of  the  Scriptures,  and 
he  shall  be  free  and  safe  and  with  perfect  immunity,  so  that  my 
Lords  may  in  the  future  be  relieved  of  the  daily  complaints  which 
arise  from  such  dissension  and  quarrels.  For  my  Lords  have 
become  weary  of  such  complaints,  which  have  been  increasing 
gradually  from  both  clergy  and  laity. 

At  these  remarks  and  invitation  Sir  Fritz  von  Anwyl,*  knight, 
and  Chamberlain  of  the  Bishop  of  Constance,  made  answer,  and 
spoke  as  follows  : 

Very  learned,  worthy,  noble,  provident,  wise,  etc.  The  worthy 
Lord  and  Prince,  Sir  Hugo,!  by  grace  of  God  Bishop  of  Constance, 
my  gracious  Lord,  well  knows  and  is  for  the  most  part  well  in- 
formed that  now  everywhere  in  his  Grace's  bishopric  many 
quarrels  and  dissensions  of  many  kinds  with  regard  to  doctrines 
or  sermons  have  arisen  in  almost  every  place.  And  although  his 
Grace  has  ever  been  of  the  desire  and  feeling,  and  always  will  be 
if  God  will,  to  show  himself  always  gracious,  kind  and  willing  in 
all  those  things  which  can  further  peace  and  harmony,  still  his 
Grace  at  the  especial  request  and  petition  of  the  wise  and  honor- 
able Council  of  Zurich  has  ordered  your  accredited  representa- 
tives here  present,  the  worthy  Lords,  Sir  Doctor  Vergenhans, 
canon,  his  Grace's  Vicar,J  Sir  Doctor  Martin, §  of  Tubingen, 
together  with  myself,  his  Grace's  servant,  to  listen  to  and  to  hear 
such  causes  of  dissension.  He  has  recommended  us  to  act  in 
such  matters  not  otherwise  than  kindly,  to  say  the  best  that  we 
can  in  the  matter,  so  that  it  result  in  the  honor,  peace  and  har- 

*  He  later  went  over  to  the  Reformed  Church, 
t  Von  Hohenlanclenberg,  d.  1532. 

+  Johannes  Ileigerlin,  commonly  called  Faber  or  Fabri,  because  his  father 
was  a  smith.  He  became  successively  pastor  at  Lindau,  vicar-general  of  Con- 
stance (1516)  and  bishop  of  Vienna  (1530).  Born  at  Lentkirch,  near  Lake 
Constance,  in  1478,  he  died  at  Baden,  near  Vienna,  May  21,  I54i' 

§  Blansch.     He  wrote  later  at  Constance  against  the  Reformed  preachers. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  47 

mony  for  the  honorable  Council  of  Zurich,  likewise  the  worthy 
clergy.  Wherefore,  learned,  worthy,  honorable,  wise  Lords  and 
good  friends,  I  say :  If  there  is  any  one  here  present  who  desires 
to  make  any  remonstrance  or  accusation  on  account  of  the  doc- 
trines or  sermons  that  have  been  delivered  here,  we  shall,  accord- 
ing to  the  commands  of  my  gracious  Lord  of  Constance,  as  his 
Grace's  representatives,  hsten  gladly  and  wilHngly,  and  for  the 
sake  of  peace  and  harmony,  as  far  as  in  us  lies,  shall  help  to 
judge  the  dissension,  if  such  has  arisen  or  shall  arise,  in  order 
that  a  worthy  clergy  may  remain  in  peace  and  friendship  until 
my  gracious  Lord  and  Prince,  together  with  his  Grace's  scholars 
and  prelates,  shall  further  discuss  and  consider  these  matters. 
That  was  the  sum  of  his  whole  discourse. 

Then  Master  Ulrich  Zwingli  spoke  in  answer,  and  his  remarks 
in  the  beginning  were  as  follows : 

Pious  brothers  in  Christ,  Almighty  God  has  always  shown  His 
divine  grace,  will  and  favor  to  man  from  the  beginning  of  the 
world,  has  been  as  kind  as  a  true  and  almighty  father,  as  we  read 
and  know  from  all  the  Sriptures,  so  that  everlasting,  merciful 
God  has  communicated  His  divine  word  and  His  will  to  man  as 
a  consolation.  And  although  at  some  times  He  has  kept  away 
this  same  word,  the  light  of  truth,  from  the  sinful  and  godless 
struggling  against  the  truth,  and  although  He  has  allowed  to  fall 
into  error  those  men  who  followed  their  own  will  and  the  leadings 
of  their  wicked  nature,  as  we  are  truly  informed  in  all  Bible  his- 
tories, still  He  has  always  in  turn  consoled  His  own  people  with 
the  light  of  His  everlasting  word,  so  that,  whereas  they  had 
fallen  into  sin  and  error,  they  may  again  be  lifted  by  His  divine 
mercy,  and  He  has  never  entirely  forsaken  them  or  let  them 
depart  from  His  divine  recognition.  This  I  say  to  you,  dear 
brethren,  for  this  purpose.  You  know  that  now  in  our  time,  as 
also  many  years  heretofore,  the  pure,  clear  and  bright  hght,  the 
word  of  God,  has  been  so  dimmed  and  confused  and  paled  with 
human  ambitions  and  teachings  that  the  majority  who  by  word 


48  ZWINOLT    SELECTIONS. 

of  mouth  call  themselves  Christians  know  nothing  less  than  the 
divine  will.  But  by  their  own  invented  service  of  God,  holiness, 
external  spiritual  exhibition,  founded  upon  human  customs  and 
laws,  they  have  gone  astray,  and  have  thus  been  persuaded  by 
those  whom  people  consider  learned  and  leaders  of  others  to  the 
extent  that  the  simple  think  that  such  invented  external  worship 
is  spiritual,  and  that  the  worship  of  God,  which  they  have  put 
upon  themselves,  necessariy  conduces  to  happiness,  although  all 
our  true  happiness,  consolation  and  good  consists,  not  in  our 
merits,  nor  in  such  external  works,  rather  alone  in  Jesus  Christ 
our  Saviour,  to  whom  the  heavenly  Father  Himself  gave  witness 
that  we  should  hear  Him  as  His  beloved  Son.  His  will  and  true 
service  we  can  learn  and  discover  only  from  His  true  word  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures  and  in  the  trustworthy  writings  of  His  twelve 
apostles,  otherwise  from  no  human  laws  and  statutes.  Since  now 
certain  pious  hearts  have  ventured  to  preach  this  by  the  grace 
and  inspiration  of  God's  holy  spirit,  and  to  bring  it  before  the 
people,  they  call  these  preachers  not  Christians,  but  persecutors 
of  the  Christian  Church,  and  even  heretics.  I  am  considered 
one  of  these  by  many  of  the  clergy  and  the  laity  everywhere  in 
the  Confederation.  And  although  I  know  that  for  the  past  five 
years  I  have  preached  in  this  city  of  Zurich  nothing  but  the  true, 
pure  and  clear  word  of  God,  the  holy  Gospel,  the  joyous  message 
of  Christ,  the  Holy  Scripture,  not  by  the  aid  of  man,  but  by  the 
aid  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  still  all  this  did  not  help  me.  But  I  am 
maligned  by  many  as  a  heretic,  a  liar,  a  deceiver,  and  one  diso- 
bedient to  the  Christian  Church,  which  facts  are  well  known  to 
my  Lords  of  Zurich.  I  made  complaint  of  these  things  before 
them  as  my  Lords;  I  have  often  entreated  and  begged  of  them 
in  the  public  pulpit  to  grant  me  permission  to  give  an  account  of 
my  sermons  and  preachings  (delivered  in  their  city)  before  all  men, 
learned  or  not,  spiritual  or  secular,  also  before  our  gracious  Lord, 
the  Bishop  of  Constance,  or  his  representative.  This  I  also  offered 
to  do  in  the  city  of  Constance,  providing  a  safe  permit  was  assured 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  49 

me,  as  has  ever  been  done  in  the  case  of  those  from  Constance.  At 
such  request  of  mine,  my  Lords,  perhaps  by  divine  will,  you  have 
granted  me  permission  to  hold  a  discussion  in  German  before 
the  assembled  Council,  for  which  privilege  I  thank  you  especially 
as  my  Lords.  I  have  also  brought  together  in  outline  the  con- 
tents and  import  of  all  my  speeches  and  sermons  delivered  at 
Zurich,  have  issued  the  same  in  German  through  the  press,  so 
that  every  one  might  see  and  know  what  my  doctrine  and  ser- 
mons at  Zurich  have  been,  and  shall  be  in  the  future,  unless  I 
am  convinced  of  something  else.*  I  hope  and  am  confident, 
indeed  I  know,  that  my  sermons  and  doctrine  are  nothing  else 
than  the  holy,  true,  pure  Gospel,  which  God  desired  me  to  speak 
by  the  intuition  and  inspiration  of  His-  spirit.  But  from  what 
intent  or  desire  God  has  wished  such  things  to  take  place 
through  me.  His  unworthy  servant,  I  cannot  know,  for  He  alone 
knows  and  understands  the  secret  of  His  counsels.  Wherefore 
I  offer  here  to  any  one  who  thinks  that  my  sermons  or  teachings 
are  unchristian  or  heretical  to  give  the  reasons  and  to  answer 
kindly  and  without  anger.  Now  let  them  speak  in  the  name  of 
God.     Here  I  am. 

At  such  remarks  of  Master  Ulrich  the  Vicar  t  from  Constance 
arose,  and  answered  as  follows  : 

Learned,  worthy,  noble,  steadfast,  favorable,  wise,  etc.  My 
good  fellow-brother  and  Lord,  Master  Ulrich,  begins  and  com- 
plains that  he  has  always  preached  the  holy  Gospel  here  pubHcly 
in  Zurich,  of  which  I  have  no  doubt,  for  who  would  not  truly 
and  faithfully  preach  the  holy  Gospel  and  St.  Paul,  providing  God 
had  ordained  him  as  a  preacher?  For  I  am  also  a  preacher,  or 
priest,  perhaps  unworthy,  but  I  have  taught  those  entrusted  to 
me  for  instruction  in  the  word  of  God  in  nothing  but  the  true 
Gospel,  which  I  can  also  prove  with  true  witness.  And  I  shall 
for  the  future  not  in  any  way  cease  to  preach  this,  providing  God 

*  This  refers  to  the  67  Articles  he  issued  preparatory  to  the  Disputation, 
t  That  is  the  vicar-general. 


50  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

does  not  require  me  for  other  labors  in  the  service  of  my  gracious 
Lord  of  Constance.  For  the  holy  Gospel  is  a  power  of  God,  as 
St.  Paul  writes  to  the  Romans  (i.  i6),  to  each  one  who  believes 
therein. 

But  now  that  Master  Ulrich  begins  and  complains  that  certain 
people  blame  him  as  not  having  spoken  and  preached  the  truth, 
but  offers  and  has  offered  to  answer  for  his  speeches  and  sermons 
to  any  one,  also  (even)  in  Constance,  I  say,  dear  Lords,  that 
if  Master  Ulrich,  my  good  Lord  and  friend,  should  come  to  me 
in  Constance  I  would  show  him  as  my  good  friend  and  Lord  all 
friendship  and  honor  as  far  as  lay  in  my  power,  and  if  he  sa 
desires  would  also  entertain  him  in  my  house,  not  only  as  a  good 
friend,  but  also  as  a  brother.  Of  this  he  is  assured  at  my  hands. 
Further,  I  say  that  I  did  not  come  here  to  oppose  evangelical  or 
apostolical  doctrines,  but  to  hear  those  who  are  said  to  speak  or 
to  have  spoken  against  the  doctrine  of  the  holy  Gospel,  and  if 
any  dissension  should  arise  or  should  have  arisen  to  help  to  judge 
and  to  decide  the  matter  in  kindness,  as  far  as  may  be,  to  the 
end  of  peace  and  harmony  rather  than  disturbance  (discord). 
For  the  Gospel  and  the  divine  Paul  teach  only  what  serves  to 
grace  and  peace,  not  to  disturbance  and  strife.*  But  if  there  is 
a  desire  to  dispute  and  oppose  good  old  customs,  the  ways  and 
usages  of  the  past,  then  in  such  case  I    say  that   I    shall    not 

*  [*'  You  well  understood  how  Zwingli  spoke  about  peace  and  strife;  and 
the  words  he  spoke  you  refer  to  yourself.  Zwingli  spoke  not  about  the' 
strife  of  weapons  or  the  discord  of  the  faithful.  For  you  know  well  that 
he  said:  'God  be  thanked  that  the  pious  city  of  Zurich  is  so  inclined  to 
peace,  and  knows  well  that  this  comes  from  the  word  of  God  alone,  which 
they  hear  and  accept  so  faithfully.'  But  I  say  that  the  Gospel  commands 
strife  between  the  faithful  and  the  Godless.  Do  you  not  know  how  Christ  says 
in  the  Gospel  of  Matt.  x.  34,  '  I  am  not  come,'  etc.?  How  can  it  be  preached 
in  peace?  Indeed,  if  the  whole  world  were  believers  it  might  be;  otherwise 
not.  For  Christ  is  the  stumbling-block,  at  which  many  will  be  offended;  these 
are  of  the  world,  and  the  devil  is  their  Lord,  who  will  untertake  to  maintain 
his  empire  without  ceasing  with  hisown?"     (Hans  Hager  in  "Gyrenrupfen.")} 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  5 1 

undertake  to  dispute  anything  here  at  Zurich.  For,  as  I  think, 
such  matters  are  to  be  settled  by  a  general  Christian  assembly  of 
all  nations,  or  by  a  council  of  bishops  and  other  scholars  as  are 
found  at  universities,  just  as  occurred  in  times  past  among  the 
holy  apostles  in  Jerusalem,  as  we  read  in  Acts  xv.  For  if  such 
matters  touching  the  common  customs  and  the  praiseworthy 
usages  of  the  past  were  discussed,  and  some  decision  reached 
against  them,  such  changes  would  perhaps  not  please  other 
Christians  dwelling  in  other  places,  who  would  doubtless  assert 
thai  they  had  not  consented  to  our  views.  For  what  would  those 
in  Spain,  in  Italy,  in  France  and  in  the  North  say  about  it?  Such 
things  must  surely,  as  I  said,  be  ratified  and  maintained  as 
formerly,  by  a  general  council,  in  order-  to  be  valid  elsewhere. 
Therefore,  dear  lords,  I  speak  now  for  myself.  As  a  Christian 
member  and  brother  in  Christ  I  beg  and  urge  you  to  consider 
these  things  well,  lest  hereafter  further  and  greater  strife  and 
harm  may  result.  Accordingly  it  would  be  my  sincere  advice 
to  drop  any  difference  or  dissension  that  may  have  arisen  con- 
cerning papal  or  other  ecclesiastical  ordinances  (^constitutions) 
of  long  standing,  and  without  further  disputing  to  lay  aside  and 
postpone  them,  to  see  if  they  could  not  be  arranged  meantime 
more  peacefully  and  advantageously.  For  my  gracious  Lord  of 
Constance  is  informed  that  it  is  decided  at  Nuremberg  by  the 
estates  {StdJideji)  of  the  empire  to  hold  a  general  council  of  the 
German  nation  within  a  year,  in  which  I  hear  half  the  judges 
selected  are  secular  and  the  other  half  ecclesiastical,  and  they 
are  to  judge  and  decide  about  the  things  which  are  now  disturb- 
ing nearly  all  the  world.  If  such  takes  place  these  matters 
should  be  referred  to  them  as  having  the  authority  and  power. 
And  so  it  is  the  earnest  desire  of  my  Lord,  as  far  as  possible,  to 
have  such  differences  about  the  clergy  settled  without  dispute 
for  the  good  of  yourselves  and  all  (other)  Christians.  For 
though  these  old  ordinances,  laws  and  customs  should  be  dis- 
cussed pro  and  con  upon  scriptural  basis,  who  would  be  judge  of 


52  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

these  matters?  According  to  my  opinion  whatever  such  things 
one  would  discuss  should  be  brought  before  the  universities,  as 
at  Paris,  Cologne  or  Louvain.  (Here  all  laughed,  for  Zwingli 
interrupted  by  asking  :  ''  How  about  Erfurt?  Would  not  Witten- 
berg do?"  Then  the  legate  said  :  "No  ;  Luther  was  too  near." 
He  also  said  :  "All  bad  things  come  from  the  North.")  There 
one  can  find  many  taught  in  the  Scriptures,  who  have  ability  to 
handle  so  great  subjects.  In  this  remark  I  do  not  wish  to  be 
taken  as  speaking  to  the  discredit  of  any  one's  honor  or  knowl- 
edge, but  as  a  Christian  member,  and  with  entire  good  nature  I 
announce  this.  But  as  far  as  my  office  and  commission  are 
concerned,  I  have  been  sent  here,  as  I  said  before,  for  no  other 
purpose  than  to  listen,  and  not  to  dispute.* 

*["You  have  left  out  the  right  sense,  namely,  that  everything  should  be 
written  down.  Now  speak  and  give  answer  if  we  did  not  dispute  fore  and 
afternoon  about  a  judge,  when  Master  Ulrich  Zwingli  declared  that  he 
would  not  suffer  any  one  as  judge  except  all  Christian  believers.  Have 
you  not  ears  and  heard  that  I  have  often  referred  to  this  opinion;  always  at 
times  when  heretics  arose  a  council  was  held,  and  by  its  means  the  heretics 
had  been  thus  subdued?  Hereupon  I  named  Arius,  Sabellius,  Nestorius, 
Manichee  and  many  others;  and  what  was  thus  recognized  thereby  it  should 
remain.  For  if  this  were  not  done  and  held  (have  you  not  heard  that  I  said?), 
there  would  be  as  many  beliefs  as  there  are  many  countries,  yea  as  many  as 
there  are  cities,  villages,  es'.ates,  houses  and  people,  if  one  does  come  with 
matters  pertaining  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Scriptures  before  the  councils. 
I  have  further  shown  that  in  recent  years  in  such  matters  as  have  arisen  thus 
between  scholars,  and  always  in  times  of  misunderstanding  in  regard  to  the 
Scripture,  the  universities  have  been  chosen  as  judges.  But  when  one  of  you 
spoke,  his  words  were  considered  as  flowing  from  the  spirit  of  God,  as  if  into 
you  alone  the  spirit  of  God  enters  (as  St.  Paul  writes),  and  you  alone  were  the 
wine-rooms  of  Jove,  and  all  secrets  of  the  empire  of  God  were  made  known  in 
them;  but  what  the  holy  Fathers  spoke,  wrote  and  ordained,  and  also  the 
speeches  of  us,  the  ambassadors,  were  to  be  considered  as  human  nonsense, 
as  I  have  related  at  length.  St.  Paul  himself  awaited  and  received  from  the 
apostles  a  letter  (Acts  xv.),  in  which  they  wrote:  *  For  it  seemed  good  to  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  us,'  etc.,  and  yet  he  was  ordained  by  God  as  magister, 
as  '  magister  gentium.'  Hence  the  worthy  Master  Ulrich  Zwingli  should  justly 
also  await  and  accept  decision  and  judgment.    This  was  said  by  me  more  than 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  53 

Then  Master  Ulrich  Zwingli  spoke  as  follows :  Pious  brothers 
in  Christ,  the  worthy  Lord  Vicar  seeks  so  many  evasions  and 
subterfuges  for  the  purpose  of  turning  your  simplicity  from  your 
understanding  with  artful,  rhetorical,  evasive  words.*  For  he 
claims  and  says  that  he  does  not  desire  to  discuss  the  good  old 

once  before  noon,  but  never  before  noon  answered  by  the  worthy  Master  Ulrich. 
To  be  sure,  after  noon  he  did  say  a  little,  but  did  not  better  the  matter,  but  as 
far  as  he  was  concerned  (as  I  understood  it)  made  it  worse.     (Faber. ) 

"  Hereupon  Hans  Hab,  according  to  '  Gyrenrupfen,'  answered:  '  It  may  be 
that  Zwingli  forgot  to  answer  in  the  forenoon ;  what  does  that  matter  ?  Who  would 
have  cared  to  answer  your  lengthy  nonsense  ?  But  didn't  he  answer  it  after  din- 
ner? Hence  let  us  sit  in  judgment  upon  the  XV.  chapter  of  the  Acts,  then  we 
shall  find  it  is  against  you,  and  not  for  you.  You  have  spoken  in  this  manner, 
we  will  now  let  it  be,  and  as  often  as  one  wished  to  consider  the  books  you  have 
gotten  out  of  it  in  another  fashion.'  Faber  continues:  *  In  his  little  book 
about  the  choice  of  food  Zwingli  has  permitted  all  food,  and  still  it  is  found  in 
the  letter  which  Paul  received  at  Jerusalem  from  the  twelve  apostles  that  the 
sacrifice  of  calves  and  other  meat  which  was  offered  to  the  idols  was  forbidden. 
He  thinks  that  this  ordinance  has  expired  if  there  is  no  more  heathenism  or 
idolatry,  which  I  did  not  answer  for  good  reason.  But  see  whether  there  be 
not  in  Africa  still  idolatry,  and  Christians  still  live  among  them  in  the  newly- 
discovered  islands,'  etc.  Hereupon  Hab  (ib.)  again  :  '  Do  you  not  remember 
that  Zwingli  said  Paul  himself  did  not  keep  it?  Why  don't  you  look  at  the 
Scriptures  with  him?'  Faber  continues:  'Not  I,  but  Mr.  Fritz  v.  Anwyl, 
reported  concerning  this  at  the  council  of  Nurnberg.  For  that  I  refer  to  him 
and  your  lords  of  Zurich.  But  if  nevertheless  I  have  said  it,  then  see  whether 
Master  Ulrich  or  I  had  better  information  from  Nurnberg — look  at  the  decree 
of  Nurnberg.  But  the  new  teachers  and  evangelists  from  the  North  do  not 
wish  any  weight  to  be  given  to  past  or  future  decrees  or  councils  unless  they 
favor  them.  But  they  do  rightly;  they  know  that  their  doctrine  would  be 
condemned  before  even  half  of  the  fathers  had  gathered — they  cannot  endure 
the  councils.  Their  song  must  not  only  be  the  song  of  the  angels,  but  of  God, 
and  whatever  the  pious  fathers  say  only  human  foolishness.'  (Faber,  correc- 
tion.) How  often  have  you  heard  from  Zwingli  that  he  did  not  wish  to  have 
only  two  judges,  but  to  have  all  believers  judge  whether  you  or  he  is  corrupting 
the  Scriptures.     But  you  were  unable  to  come  to  this."     ("Gyrenrupfen.")] 

*  ["  Have  you  not  heard  that  Zwingli  said  there  was  too  much  of  my  talk, 
and  I  thereupon  offered  to  prove  my  statements  if  all  things  were  noted  down, 
for  I  do  not  care  to  speak  into  the  air?"     (Faber.)] 


54  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

customs  or  venerable  usages  concerning  ecclesiastical  ordinances, 
but  I  say  that  we  do  not  want  to  ask  here  how  long  this  or  that 
custom  or  habit  has  been  in  use.  But  we  desire  to  speak  of  the 
truth  (to  find  out),  whether  a  man  is  bound  by  divine  ordinance 
to  keep  that  which  on  account  of  long  usage  has  been  set  up  as 
law  by  men.  For  we  of  course  think  (as  also  the  pope's  own 
decree  says)  that  custom  should  yield  to  truth.  As  to  claim- 
ing that  such  matters  should  be  settled  by  a  Christian  as- 
sembly of  all  nations,  or  by  a  council  of  bishops,  etc.,  I  say 
that  here  in  this  room  is  without  doubt  a  Christian  assembly.* 
For  I  hope  that  the  majority  of  us  here  desire  from  divine  will 
and  love  to  hear,  to  further  and  to  know  the  truth,  which  wish 
Almighty  God  will  not  deny  us  if  we  desire  it  to  His  honor  with 
right  behef  and  right  hearts.  For  the  Lord  says  :  Where  two  or 
three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  I  am  there  among 
them.  Also  in  times  past  did  not  bishops  assemble  in  councils 
as  secular  princes?  How  then  are  we  to  claim  and  say  that  the 
pious  fathers  of  past  times  assembled  for  Christian  business? 
Were  there  not  doubtless  such  powerful  prelates  and  bishops  as 
now,  as  they  say  there  must  be?  This  is  truthfully  proved  by 
the  testimony  of  trustworthy  writings  of  old.  And  this  is  proved 
also  by  the  word  "Episcopus,"  which  when  properly  turned  into 
German  means  no  more  than  a  watchman  or  overseer  who  has 
the  care  and  attention  of  his  people,  and  who  is  also  charged 
with  instructing  them  in  the  divine  belief  and  will ;  in  good 
German  this  is  a  clergyman  (Pfarrer).  Since  now  here  in  this 
assembly  there  are  so  many  honest,  pious,  Christian  men,  not 
alone  living  within  the  territories  of  my  Lords  of  Zurich,  but  also 
coming  from  elsewhere,  and  also  many  learned.  Godfearing 
bishops  and  clergymen,  who  sit  here  without  doubt  to  further  the 
truth  of  God  and  to  hear  and  to  know  the  divine  truth,  there  is 
then,  in  spite  of  what  the  Vicar  says,  no  reason  why  they  should 

*  [*'In  which  there  are  many  Godfearing  curates;  also  many  doctors  and 
real  friends  of  God."     (BuUinger.)] 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  55 

not  discuss  these  matters,  speak  and  decide  the  truth.  To  thel 
remark  that  the  other  nations  would  not  consent,  I  answer  that  this 
is  just  the  complaint  which  is  made  every  day  concerning  the  "  big 
moguls"  {grossen  Hansen^  literally  "big  Jacks),  bishops  and 
priests,  that  they  undertake  to  keep  the  pure  and  clear  Gospel, 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  from  the  common  people.  For  they  say  that 
it  is  not  proper  for  any  but  themselves  to  expound  the  Scriptures,' 
just  as  though  other  pious  men  were  not  Christians  and  had  noth-\ 
ing  to  do  with  the  spirit  of  God,  and  must  be  without  knowledge  j 
of  God's  word.  And  there  are  also  some  of  them  who  might  1 
say  that  it  is  improper  to  publish  the  secrets  of  the  divine  Scrip- 
tures.* For  there  is  no  doubt  in  my  mind  that  if  the  pure  truth 
of  Christ  alone,  not  adulterated  with  human  ordinances,  were 
preached  to  the  above-mentioned  peoples  or  nations,  and  not 
covered  up  with  papal  and  imperial  mandates  and  those  of 
bishops,  they  would  as  pious  Christian  hearts  accept  the  truth 
and  let  the  customs  or  ordinances  (^constitutions')  of  men  go, 
and  enlightened  by  God's  word,  would  be  in  harmony  and 
agreement  with  the  others.  However,  as  to  the  council  which 
is  said  to  be  announced  at  Nuremberg,  it  seems  to  me  that 
the  thing  is  proposed  only  to  put  off  the  common  people 
desirous  of  God's  word.  For  I  tell  you,  dear  Lords,  that  let- 
ters came  to  me  about  three  days  ago  from  Nuremberg,!  which 
I  could  show  if  necessary,  in  which  there  was,  to  be  sure,  some 
mention  made  of  a  council,  but  I  do  not  understand  that  anything 
has  really  been  decided.  For  pope,  bishops,  prelates  and  the  '  big 
moguls '  will  allow  no  council  in  which  the  divine  Scriptures  were  set 
forth  in  their  clearness  and  purity.  It  is  also  plain  that  nothing 
will  come  of  it  this  year,  however  much  the  common  Christian 
earnestly  did  toward  it,  because  sufficient  supplies  could  not  be 

*  ["  I  did  not  write  a  book  '  de  non  revelandis  mysteriis,'  but  against  the 
rash,  against  those  who  in  an  impious  manner  handle  holy  things  or  Scriptures.' 
(Faber.)] 

t  These  letters  are  no  longer  extant. 


56  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

collected  in  so  short  a  time  for  so  large  an  assembly.  I  concede 
also  that  a  council  will  be  announced  in  time.  But  meanwhile 
how  are  we  to  treat  those  whose  consciences  have  gone  astray 
so  far  as  to  desire  eagerly  to  know  the  truth?  Would  you  rob 
these  thirsty  souls  of  the  truth,  let  them  hang  in  doubt,  frighten 
them  by  human  ordinances,  and  let  them  live  or  die  in  uncer- 
tainty as  to  the  truth?  Really,  my  pious  brethren,  this  is  no 
small  thing.  God  will  not  demand  of  us  what  pope,  bishop  and 
council  establish  and  command,  nor  how  long  this  or  that  has 
been  in  praiseworthy  and  ancient  usage,  but  He  will  find  out 
how  His  divine  will,  word  and  commandments  have  been  kept.* 
Now  finally,  since  reference  is  made  to  the  judges  which  my 
Lord  Vicar  thinks  cannot  be  found  outside  the  universities,  I  say 
that  we  have  here  infallible  and  unprejudiced  judges,  that  is  the 
Holy  Writ,  which  can  neither  lie  nor  deceive.     These  we  have 

*  [Hager  in  "  Gyrenrupfen  "  presents  the  dispute  about  the  council  thus: 
"After  this  Mr.  Fritz,  the  majordomo,  very  cleverly  presented  the  com- 
mand of  his  master,  saying  that  his  master  had  been  surely  informed, 
that  in  a  year  there  would  be  a  council.  Concerning  this  Zwingli  did 
not  wish  to  speak.  Thereupon  you  immediately  began  to  speak,  and  rose 
and  said  the  same  as  Mr.  Fritz  had  just  said,  and  in  a  nice  way  referred 
to  the  future  council  and  showed  yourself  a  little  more,  just  as  if  the  matter 
had  not  also  been  commended  to  you.  Thereupon  Zwingli  arose,  and  said  we 
should  not  be  led  astray  by  the  council;  he  also  had  had  a  letter  in  which  he 
was  informed  how  the  German  princes  had  demanded  from  the  pope  that  he 
have  a  council  within  a  year,  but  that  the  pope  had  formally  assented  had  not 
yet  happened,  nor  is  it  possible  (he  said)  that  within  the  space  of  a  year  & 
general  council  could  be  gathered  together;  furthermore  the  three  mightiest 
lords,  King  of  France,  Emperor,  and  King  of  England,  were  at  war  with  each 
other,  who  could  not  easily  be  conciliated ;  also  that  the  fixing  of  the  council 
would  be  left  to  the  Germans.  Hence  one  could  see  that  the  promise  of  a 
council  was  only  a  postponement,  not  a  definite  resolve;  but  it  mattered  little 
whether  they  had  a  council  or  not,  for  he  believed  that  no  man  would  live  to 
see  a  council  in  which  the  word  of  God  would  be  allowed  to  rule.  Therefore, 
even  if  a  council  should  be  held  at  once,  one  would  not  care  either,  for  we 
would  depend  upon  and  preach  the  word  of  God;  may  the  councils  determine 
herein  what  they  please."     After  this  he  from  Neftenbach  arose  and  spoke.] 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  57 

present  in  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin  tongues;  these  let  us  take 
on  both  sides  as  fair  and  just  judges.* 

Also  we  have  here  in  our  city,  God  be  praised,  many  learned 
colleagues  who  are  as  sufficiently  taught  in  these  three  languages 
as  none  at  the  universities  just  named  and  mentioned  by  the 
Lord  Vicar.     But  I  am  speaking  of  those  who  conduct  the  above- 
mentioned  universities  as  superiors  and  heads ;  I  do  not  mean 
Erasmus  of  Rotterdam  and  others,  who  stay  at  times  at  the  uni- 
versities as  strangers  and  guests.     Here  in  this  room  are  sitting 
also  doctors  of  the  Holy  Writ,  doctors  of  canonical  law,  many 
scholars  from  the  universities.     They  should  hear  the  Scriptures 
which  are  referred  to,  have  them  read,  to  see  if  that  is  so  which 
they  try  and  pretend    to    support    by    divine    Scriptures.     And 
as  if  all  that  was  not  sufficient  there  are  in  this  assembly  many 
Christian  hearts,  taught  doubtless  by   the  Holy  Spirit,  and  pos- 
sessing such  upright  understanding,  that  in  accordance  with  God's 
spirit  they  can  judge  and  decide  which  party  produces  Scripture 
on  its  side,  right  or  wrong,  or  otherwise  does  violence  to  Scripture 
contrary  to  proper  understanding.     There  is  therefore  no  reason 
why  excuse  should  here  be  made.     Hence,  dear  friends,  do  not 
let  the  speeches  here  made  frighten  you.     And  especially  you  of 
Zurich  should  consider  it  a  great  blessing  and  power  of  God  that 
such  an  undertaking  should  be  made  here  in  your  city  to  the 
praise  and  honor  of  God,  in  order  that  the  pious  subjects  of  your 
territories  and  lands  should  no  longer,  as  heretofore,  be  suspended 
in  doubt  and  dissension.     With  humble  hearts  call  upon  God. 
He  will  not  refuse  you  His  divine  recognition,  as  the  epistle  of 
James  promises,  if  you  ask  in  true  faith,  and  do  not  let  yourselves 

*["0n  the  contrary  I  told  how  Paul  did  not  boast  of  the  languages 
when  he  went  to  the  Corinthians,  not  '  in  sublimitate  sermonis '  or  high 
wisdom.  Thus  one  finds  in  the  life  of  Hilary  that  the  evil  spirit  often 
spoke  in  Greek  and  other  tongues.  And  therefore  I  did  not  boast,  rightly, 
about  the  languages,  although  I  brought  with  me  to  you  from  Constance  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek  Bible;  also  had  them  both  with  you  at  the  city  hall.  Do 
you  think  I  have  never  heard  or  read  Hebrew  or  Greek?"     (Faber.)] 

5 


58  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

be  dissuaded  and  deceived  in  any  way  by  smooth  and  pleasant 
(well-appearing)  words. 

At  these  words  of  Zwingli's  every  one  remained  silent  for  a 
time,  and  no  one  wanted  to  say  anything  upon  the  matter,  till 
the  burgomaster  of  Zurich  arose  and  urged  any  there  present  who 
wished  to  say  anything  about  the  matter,  or  knew  anything  to  say 
about  the  affair,  to  step  forward.     But  no  one  spoke. 

Since  thus  every  one  was  silent,  and  no  one  was  anxious  to 
speak  against  Master  Ulrich,  who  had  before  been  called  a 
heretic  behind  his  back.  Master  Ulrich  himself  arose  and  spoke  : 
For  the  sake  of  Christian  love  and  truth  I  urge  and  beg  all  who 
have  spoken  earnestly  to  me  on  account  of  my  sermons  to  step 
forward  and  to  instruct  me,  for  the  sake  of  God,  in  the  truth  in 
the  presence  of  so  many  pious  and  learned  men.  In  case  they 
do  not  do  this  I  assure  them  that  I  shall  summon  publicly  by 
name  each  of  them,  of  whom  I  know  many  to  be  present.  But 
on  account  of  brotherly  love  I  wish  to  inform  them  beforehand, 
so  that  they  may  arise  of  themselves  unsummoned  by  me  and 
prove  me  a  heretic*.  But  no  one  desired  to  come  forward  or 
say  anything  against  him. 

Meantime  Gutschenkel  [a  buffoon  from  Bern],  standing  in 
front  by  the  door,  cut  a  ridiculous  caper,  and  cried  out :  "  Where 
are  now  the  '  big  moguls  '  that  boast  so  loudly  and  bravely  on, 
the  streets?  Now  step  forward  !  Here  is  the  man.  You  can 
all  boast  over  your  wine,  but  here  no  one  stirs."  All  laughed  at 
that. 

Then  Master  Ulrich  arose  again,  urged  and  begged  a  second 
time  all  who  had  accused  and  attacked  him  about  his  sermons  to  . 
step  forth  and  prove  him  a  heretic.     In  case  they  did  not  do 
that,  and  did  not  step  forward  unsummoned  by  name,  he  would 

*  ["Am  I  not  right?  If  you  do  not  do  that  I  shall  name  those  who  call  me 
heretic,  but  I  warn  you  in  advance  that  it  is  more  honest  to  step  forward  un- 
called."    (Bullinger.)     The  word  of  the  abbot  of  Cappel:  "Where  are  they 

now  who  wish  to  burn  us?"  T'ullincrer  places  here.] 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  59 

for  a  third  time  publicly  summon  them,  etc.,  as  above.  When 
every  one  remained  silent  as  to  the  invitation  and  challenge  of 
Master  Ulrich  a  priest  by  the  name  of  James  Wagner  arose, 
a  clergyman  at  Neftenbach,*  and  spoke  as  follows  :  Learned, 
wise,  honorable,  specially  favorable,  lords  (gentlemen?)  and 
princes :  Since  there  is  no  one  who  wishes  to  speak  of  these 
matters  after  the  repeated  summons  of  Master  Ulrich,  I  must,  as 
the  least  skillful,  say  something.  It  is  well  known  to  you  all, 
gentlemen,  that  our  gracious  Lord  of  Constance  this  year  issued 
a  mandate  f  ordering  people  to  retain  and  keep  the  traditiones 
hu?nanas  until  they  were  rescinded  and  changed  by  a  general 
council.  Now  since  no  one  will  say  anything  against  Master 
Ulrich's  articles,  which  oppose  the  constitiitiones  humanas,  I  say 
for  my  part,  and  hope  and  think,  that  we  ought  not  to  be  bound 
to  keep  that  mandate,  but  should  preach  the  word  of  God,  pure 
and  unadulterated  by  human  additions.  You  know  also,  dear 
Lords,  how  the  clergyman  of  Fislisbach  %  was  arrested  according 
to  the  mandate,  taken  to  Baden  before  the  Diet,  which  afterwards 
gave  him  into  the  keeping  of  the  bishop  of  Constance,  who  finally 
put  him  in  prison.  If  we  are  to  teach  and  preach  according  to 
the  contents  of  the  mandate,  then  Master  Ulrich's  words  have  no 
force.  But  since  there  is  no  one  here  present  who  dare  (darf) 
say  anything  against  them,  to  show  them  untrue,  it  is  plain  that 
proceedings  with  the  gentleman  from  Fislisbach  were  too  short. 
For  this  reason  Ispeak,  this  good  gentleman  and  clergyman  said 

*  A  village  12  miles  northeast  of  Zurich. 

t  In  Fiissli's  Beitrdgen^  IV.,  125-129. 

X  On  the  border  of  Switzerland,  but  in  Baden.  His  name  was  Urban  Weiss. 
He  had  announced  from  his  pulpit  on  his  return  from  the  Zurich  meeting  of 
August  15,  1522,  that  he  would  no  longer  call  upon  the  Virgin  Mary  or  the 
saints.  He  also  married.  The  bishop  of  Constance  complained  against  him 
at  the  Diet  of  Baden,  which  wished  him  arrested,  but  some  friends  went  surety 
for  him.  However,  the  Diet  in  November,  1522,  ordered  his  arrest.  He  was 
examined  in  Constance,  and  apparently  as  the  result  of  the  use  of  torture  re- 
canted and  then  was  liberated. 


6o  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

further,  and  I  would  like  to  have  judgment  as  to  how  I  should 
act  in  the  future  as  to  such  mandate  of  the  bishop.* 

*  [Faber  accuses  Hegenwald  of  error  in  the  order  of  his  speeches. 

"You  note  me  down  as  if  I  had  made  the  fourth  speech,  and  bring  forth 
a  speech  of  which  truly  I  would  be  ashamed,  provided  I  could  not  erase  it  by 
means  of  the  Scriptures  better  by  the  grace  of  God.    You  have  noted  me  down 
as  if  I  had  immediately  broken  forth  after  the  speech  of  Zwingli,  which  you 
know  is  not  true.     For  I  learnt  long  ago  from  Roman  histories  that  an  ambas- 
sador should  not  exceed  his  authority.     This  I  have  not  forgotten,  that  one 
should  not  preach  unless  he  be  sent.     Therefore  since  I  have  not  been  sent  by 
my  gracious  lord  as  a  combatant,  but  as  a  spectator,  yea  as  a  peaceful  umpire, 
I  did  not  wish  to  answer  the  many  speeches  and  demands;  also  partly  exhor- 
tation of  Zwingli.     And  where  there  had  been' a  long  silence,  you  know  that 
Mr.  Ulrich  ha\'ing  dared  to  name  several,  requested  us  from  Constance  urgently, 
still  I  maintained  silence  until  the  priest  (whom  you  call),  v,  Mittenbach  (Nef- 
tenbach),  referred  to  my  gracious  lord  and  myself  so  much  and  so  clearly  that 
I  thought,  and  I  also  said  it  to  the  mighty  lord  Fritz  Jacob  v.  Anwyl,  that  I 
could  not  leave  that  unanswered.     For  although  you  closed  the  speech  accord- 
ing to  your  wont,  still  you  omit  that  the  priest  says  among  other  things  that"  the 
bishop  of  Constance  had  forbidden  to  preach  the  Gospel — write  what  the  Vicar 
there  said — then  you  will  find  that  I  said  before,  I  am  not  here  to  suppress  the 
Gospel  and  St.  Paul,  for  who  would  do  that  in  view  of  the  tale  how  the  angej 
had  brought  and  proclaimed  to  the  shepherds  upon  the  pasture  when  Christ 
was  born  the  consoling  message  that  in  the  Gospel  was  the  salvation,  yea  the 
way  and  the  truth,  in  comparing  the  New  and  Old  Testament;  also  the  four  evan- 
gelists are  the  four  rivers  of  Paradise,  which  make  fruitful  the  whole  world  with 
the  water  of  divine  grace;  it  has  been  arranged  with  better  order,  as  St.  Paul 
says,  and  I  also  have  helped  in  it,  since  my  'scholastici  doctores  '  have  been 
diligently  read  and  underscored  by  me,  so  that  they  also  have  become  dirty 
from  my  hands.     Thus  I  have  also  seen   that  it  would  be  better  and  more 
wholesome  to  leave  sophistry  and  to  bring  forward  the  Gospel  and  the  prophets 
and  also  other  divine  writings.     Therefore  I  held  to  the  first  proposition,  how^  . 
this  might  happen  and  the  Gospel  be  brought  forth,  which  then  is  true  even  if 
Master  Ulrich  Zwingli  had  never  come  to  Zurich.     But  I  was  not  thus  minded, 
and  did  not  help  to  arrange  the  proposition  so  that  the  Gospel  should  be 
preached  in   a  revcilutionary  manner,  but  according  to  the  essential  Christian 
and  peaceful  understanding.     And  furthermore  I  declared  the  Gospel  does  not 
consist  in  reading,  but  in  the  strength  of  God,  yea  in  the  correct  interpretation 
and  understanding,  and  I  have  proved  by  two  places  in  the  Gospel  of  Matthew, 
Matt.  iv.  6,  where  the  tempter  cites  the  saying  Ps.  xc.     From  this  I  have  shown 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  6 1 

At  such  complaint  the  Vicar  from  Constance  again  arose,  and 
spoke  as  follows  :  These  remarks  are  meant  to  refer  partly  to  my 
gracious  Lord  of  Constance  and  partly  to  me  as  his  Grace's  Vicar, 
therefore  it  is  proper  that  I  answer  them.  The  good  gentleman 
— I  really  do  not  know  who  he  is — spoke  first  as  follows,  saying 
that  this  year  our  gracious  Lord  of  Constance  issued  a  mandate 
ordering  people  to  keep  the  constitutiones  hti?na7ias,  that  is  the 
human  ordinances  and  praiseworthy  customs.  To  this  I  say, 
dear  lords  and  gentlemen,  there  are  truly  many  unfair,  ungodly, 
unchristian  opinions  and  errors  at  hand,  which  very  often  are 
preached  and  put  before  the  people,  not  only  here  in  the 
Confederation,  but  also  elsewhere  in  my  gracious  Lord's  (of 
Constance)  bishopric  by  unskillful  preachers,  which  opinions 
and  errors,  my  dear  lords  and  gentlemen,  serve  more  to  disobedi- 
ence, disturbance  and  discord  than  the  furthering  of  Christian 
unity.  For  they  desire  to  estrange  us  from  the  good  old  inherited 
customs  and  usages  descended  upon  us  from  our  old  pious  Chris- 
tian fathers  many  hundred  years  ago.  Perhaps  it  was  with  this 
in  mind  that  my  gracious  Lord  issued  the  mandate  for  the  sake 
of  peace  and  unity  in  his  Grace's  bishopric.  Of  what  the  real 
contents  of  the  mandate  were  I  have  no  accurate  knowledge, 
for  at  that  time,  as  is  known  to  many,  I  was  absent  from  home. 

that  also  the  evil  spirit  might,  as  an  old  scholar,  use  and  know  the  Scriptures — 
and  Matt.  ii.  6,  where  the  scribes  cite  the  saying  of  Micah  of  Bethlehem,  but 
omitted  the  following  correct  point — thus  by  means  of  these  two  quotations  I 
have  well  proven  that  it  is  not  always  sufficient  to  cite  the  Gospel  or  the  Scrip- 
tures (although  they  have  the  first  seat  and  the  greatest  honor),  and  that  the 
Scriptures  do  not  consist  in  the  reading,  but  in  the  correct  interpretation;  thus 
and  not  otherwise  it  was  done.  Why  didn't  you  note  that  down  also  for  me? 
Why  do  you  conceal  that  from  me?  And  in  still  more  unfair  and  wrongful 
fashion  did  you  note  down  this  and  other  of  my  speeches,  how  I  so  often  cited 
the  pope  and  the  pope's  affairs."  (Faber,  correction.)  "When  you  cited 
how  also  the  devil  had  made  use  of  the  Scriptures,  Zwingli  had  answered  that 
is  what  he  was  there  for,  to  give  answer  that  he  had  used  them  correctly.  But 
you  do  not  wish  to  take  hold  of  the  Scriptures."  (Hans  Hager  in  "Gyren- 
rupfen.")] 


62  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

Therefore  as  far  as  concerns  this  mandate  I  do  not  desire  to 
speak  further.  But  since  the  good,  pious  gentleman  (I  don't 
know  where  he  sits,  because  I  cannot  see  him,)  has  referred 
to  the  priest  imprisoned  at  Constance  my  office  requires  me  to 
make  answer.  You  all  know,  dear  sirs,  how  this  priest  was  turned 
over  to  my  gracious  Lord  of  Constance  by  the  common  peers 
[Ht.  confederates :  citizens  of  the  Confederac)^]  in  the  diet  at 
Baden  as  a  guilty  man.  Accordingly  my  gracious  Lord  had  the 
prisoner  examined  and  questioned  by  appointees  of  his  Grace, 
and  the  prisoner  was  found  to  be  an  ignorant  and  erring  man  in 
the  divine  Scriptures,  and  I  myself  have  often  pitied  his  unskillful 
remarks.  For  by  my  faith  I  can  say  that  I  questioned  him 
myself,  went  to  him  in  Christian  love,  set  forth  to  him  some  of 
the  Scriptures  from  St.  Paul,  and  he  made — what  shall  I  say? — 
very  inaccurate  answers.  Ah,  my  dear  sirs,  what  shall  I  say  about 
this  good,  simple  fellow?  He  is  really  untutored,  and  is  not 
even  a  grammarian.*  For  in  Christian  brotherly  love,  kindly  and 
without  any  anger,  I  mentioned  to  him  some  Scriptures,  as  for 
instance,  that  the  noble  Paul  exhorted  Timothy,  saying  :  Pietas 
ad  omnia  utilis  (kindness  and  greatness  are  good  in  all  things), 
and  his  answer  was  so  childish  and  unchristian  as  to  be  improper 
to  mention  and  report  in  the  Confederation.  But  that  you  may 
really  know,  my  dear  sirs,  I  spoke  with  him  about  praying  to  the 
dear  saints  and  to  the  mother  of  God,  also  about  their  intercession, 
and  I  found  him  so  ignorant  and  unchristian  on  these  points 
that  I  pity  his  error.  He  insists  on  making  living  out  of  the' 
dead,  although  the  Scriptures  show  that  also  before  the  birth  of 
Christ  the  dear  saints  were  prayed  to  and  called  upon  for  others, 
as  I  finally  convinced  and  persuaded  him  by  means  of  Scriptures, 
that  is,  by  Genesis,  Exodus,  Ezechiel  and  Baruch.  I  also  brought 
matters  so  far  that  he  recanted  his  error,  and  desires  to  recant 
all  his  errors  about  the  mother  of  God  and  the  dear  saints.  I 
also  hope  that  he  will  be  grateful  to  me  and  soon  be  released. 

*  That  is  not  a  Latinist. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUl'ATION.  63 

Therefore,  my  dear  sirs,  with  regard  to  the  impirsoned  priest 
there  is  truly  no  reason  why  my  gracious  Lord  of  Constance,  or 
his  representative,  should  be  blamed  for  this  affair.  For  nothing 
has  been  done  other  than  what  was  proper,  fair  and  becoming. 

To  this  Master  Ulrich  answered  as  folows :  Dear  brethren  in 
Christ,  it  doubtlessly  happened,  not  without  especial  destiny  and 
will  of  God,  that  my  Lord  Vicar  has  just  spoken  about  the  praying 
to  and  the  intercession  of  the  saints  and  the  mother  of  God.  For 
that  is  not  the  least  of  the  Articles  issued  by  me,  upon  which  I 
have  preached  somewhat,  and  at  which  so  many  simple  folk  are 
troubled  as  though  they  were  frightened  by  a  heretical  [lit.  un- 
christian] sermon.  For  I  know,  and  truly  find  in  the  divine 
Scriptures,  that  Jesus  Christ  alone  can  bless  us,  who,  as  Paul  says, 
alone  is  the  justice  of  all  men,  who  has  expiated  our  sins,  and 
He  alone,  our  salvation  and  Saviour,  is  the  means  of  intercession 
between  His  heavenly  Father  and  us  humans  who  believe,  as 
Saint  Paul  clearly  says  to  the  Hebrews,  and  as  you  of  Zurich  have 
often  heard  from  me  when  I  preached  to  you  from  your  favorite, 
the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews.  Now  since  my  Lord  Vicar  announces 
and  publicly  boasts  of  how  he  convinced  the  imprisoned  priest 
at  Constance,  the  clergyman  of  Fislisbach,  by  means  of  the  divine 
Scriptures,  of  the  fact  that  one  should  pray  to  the  dear  saints 
and  the  mother  of  God,  therefore  that  they  are  our  mediators 
with  God,  I  beg  of  him  for  the  sake  of  God  and  of  Christian  love 
to  show  me  the  place  and  location,  also  the  words  of  the  Scrip- 
tures, where  it  is  written  that  one  should  pray  to  the  saints  as 
mediators,  so  that  if  I  have  erred,  and  err  now,  I  may  be  better  in- 
structed, since  there  are  here  present  Bibles  in  the  Hebrew,  Greek 
and  Latin  languages.  These  we  will  have  examined  by  those 
present  who  are  sufficiently  well  taught  in  the  above-mentioned 
tongues,  so  I  desire  no  more  to  be  shown  than  the  chapters  in 
which  such  is  written,  as  my  Lord  Vicar  states,  then  we  will  have 
it  found  and  read,  so  that  we  may  see  whether  it  is  the  meaning 
of  Scripture  that  the  saints  are  to  be  prayed  to  as  mediators.     In 


64  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

case  that  is  so,  and  is  really  found  to  be  in  Scripture  (as  the  Vicar 
also  asserts  to  have  convinced  the  imprisoned  priest),  I  also  will 
gladly,  as  an  ignorant  man,  submit  to  instruction  where  I  have 
erred. 

ANSWER    OF    THE    VICAR    TO    THE    WORDS    OF    MASTER    ULRICH. 

Dear  Sirs  :  I  see  very  well  that  the  game  is  going  beyond  me.  I 
said  before  that  I  was  present  not  to  dispute,  but  as  the  representa- 
tive of  my  gracious  Lord  to  speak  kindly  if  any  dissension  arose  on 
account  of  the  disputation.  Thus  I  very  well  see  things  are  going 
with  me  as  the  wise  man  said,  the  foolish  are  easily  caught  in  their 
words,  but  it  is  perhaps  the  fault  of  my  folly  that  I  undertook  to 
speak  not  as  a  wise  man.  Since  I  have  been  summoned  to 
answer  by  Master  Ulrich,  I  will  say  that  some  hundreds  of  years 
ago  it  happened,  my  dear  sirs,  that  heresy  and  dissension  arose 
in  the  Church,  the  causes  and  beginners  of  which  were  Novatians, 
Montanists,  Sabellians,  Ebionites,  Marcionites  and  others,  under 
whose  false  teachings  and  error  many  articles  like  these  of  our 
times  were  planted  in  men,  and  by  their  teachings  many  believing 
folk  went  astray.  Among  these  some  asserted  that  praying  to  the 
dear  saints  and  their  intercession,  as  also  of  the  mother  of  God, 
and  that  purgatory,  too,  did  not  exist,  but  were  man's  invention, 
and  the  like.  In  order  to  close  up  such  misleading  roads  and 
ways  of  error  many  pious  bishops  and  fathers  met  in  many  places, 
at  one  time  in  Asia,  then  in  Africa,  then  somewhere  in  Greece, 
that  they  might  hold  synods  and  councils,  and  to  avoid  and  stop 
heresy  and  such  things.  And  afterward  constitutiones  (that  is, 
ordinances  and  decisions,)  were  made,  prescribed  and  com- 
manded about  those  matters  by  the  holy  fathers  and  the  popes 
that  such  (heretical  views)  should  not  be  held,  having  been 
rejected  by  the  Christian  Church.  And  although  this  was  firmly 
and  irrevocably  ratified  a  long  time  ago  by  decrees  of  the  popes 
and  bishops,  and  considered  wrong  in  Christian  churches,  still 
later  schisms,  dissenting  parties  and   sects  have  sprung  up  in 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  65 

Europe,  as,  to  mention  their  names,  the  Bohemians,  Picards,  who 
were  led  astray  by  such  heretics  as  Wychf  and  Hus,  living  contrary 
to  the  decrees  and  ordinances  of  the  holy  popes,  acting  contrary  to 
the  regulations  of  the  Christian  Church  and  not  putting  any  faith 
in  the  intercession  of  the  saints,  or  still  less  in  purgatory.  And 
although  such  heresy  and  error  were  later  rejected  by  all  men 
of  Christian  behef,  and  although  those  who  Hve  and  remain  in 
such  error  were  considered,  recognized  and  proclaimed  by  the 
holy  councils  as  sundered  members  of  the  mother  of  Christian 
churches,  still  one  now  finds  those  who  stir  up  these  things  anew, 
and  undertake  to  bring  into  doubt  that  which  many  years  ago 
was  recognized  and  decided  upon  as  untrue  and  erroneous  by 
pope  and  bishop.  They  undertake  to  drive  us  from  old  customs, 
which  have  endured  and  stood  in  honor  these  seven  hundred 
years,  planning  to  overturn  and  upset  all  things.  For  first  they 
went  at  the  pope,  cardinals  and  bishops,  then  they  turned  all 
cloisters  topsy-turvy,  after  that  they  fell  upon  purgatory.  And 
when  they  had  left  the  earth  they  at  last  ascended  to  heaven 
and  went  at  the  saints  and  great  servants  of  God.  Saint  Peter 
with  his  keys,  indeed  our  dear  Lady,  the  mother  of  God,  could 
not  escape  their  disgraceful  attacks.  And  I  know  some  places 
where  they  had  gone  so  far  as  even  to  Christ  Himself. 

Shall  it  now  go  so  far  that  not  only  the  authorities  and  eccle- 
siastics on  earth,  but  also  God  and  the  chosen  in  heaven,  must 
be  punished?  If  so,  it  is  a  pity.  Shall  not  all  that  be  nothing 
and  count  as  nothing  which  the  pious,  holy  fathers  assembled  in 
the  holy  spirit  of  God  have  made  and  unanimously  decided?  It 
cannot  but  have  grown  up  to  the  great  injury  and  disgrace  of  all 
Christendom.  For  the  holy  fathers  and  all  our  ancestors  must 
have  erred,  and  for  now  fourteen  hundred  years  Christianity 
must  have  been  misled  and  ruled  in  error,  which  it  were  un- 
christian to  believe,  I  do  not  need  to  say.  Now  if  the  interces- 
sion of  the  dear  saints  has  ever  been  ratified  as  necessary  and 
useful  by  popes,  bishops,  fathers  and  councils,  and  if  since  the 


66  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

time  of  the  holy  pope  Gregory  (II.)  it  has  continued  in  use 
among  all  Christianity,  it  seems  strange  to  me  that  now  for  the 
first  time  people  desire  to  consider  this  wrong  and  erroneous, 
contrary  to  Christian  ordinance,  although  there  are  few  men  who 
do  not  feel  the  aid  of  the  mother  of  God  and  the  dear  saints, 
not  alone  among  us  Christians,  but  also  among  some  unbelieving 
heathen.  If  we  here  at  Zurich  are  now  to  speak  and  fight  against 
such  customs  common  to  all  the  world,  and  especially  those  pre- 
served so  long  by  Christians,  let  each  one  think  for  himself  how 
that  would  please  those  in  the  Orient,  the  Occident,  from  sunrise 
to  sunset,  also  those  in  Hibernia,  Mauritania,  Syria,  Cappadocia 
or  in  the  Cyclades.  I  do  not  need  to  mention  countries  nearer 
our  lands.  Truly,  dear  sirs,  it  would  be  well  to  consider  before- 
hand what  dangers  and  dissensions  might  arise  for  Christianity  if 
one  were  not  in  harmony  and  agreement  with  the  whole  com- 
munity in  these  matters.  For  you  see,  as  also  a  heathen  called 
Sallust  in  "  Jugurtha  "  testifies,  that  small  things  arise  from  unity", 
but  from  dissension  great  things  decrease  and  fall  away.  There- 
fore my  advice  would  be,  not  to  consider  anything  of  these  affairs 
which  pertain  to  the  whole  Church,  but  to  save  them  for  a 
general  council.  And  although  Master  Ulrich  refers  to  Bibles 
in  Hebrew,  Latin  and  Greek,  and  thereby  consoles  himself,  which 
Scripture  also  those  here  present  being  taught  sufficiently  well  in 
the  three  languages  should  examine,  and  such  Scripture  as  is 
pertinent  to  the  case  they  should  judge  and  consider,  still  I  say, 
in  the  first  place,  that  is  not  a  small  gift  of  God  to  (be  able  to) 
expound  the  above-mentioned  languages,  and  I  do  not  boast  that 
I  possess  it.  For  these  are  especial  gifts  of  God,  as  also  Paul 
says  to  the  Corinthians  (xii.  7-10)  :  Unique  datur  manifestatio 
spiritus  ad  utilitatem,  to  each  is  given  the  manifestation  of  the 
spirit  for  use,  to  the  one  faith,  to  the  other  eloquence,  to  this  one 
the  interpretation  of  languages,  etc.  Of  these  graces  or  gifts  I 
cannot  boast  of  possessing  any,  as  I  know  nothing  of  Hebrew, 
am  not  well  taught  in  Greek,  and  understand  Latin  only  tolerably. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  67 

For  I  am  no  orator  or  poet,  and  do  not  pretend  to  be.  Finally 
I  say,  the  evangelical  and  apostolical  Scripture  is  not  found  in 
the  wise,  brilliant  or  flowery,  smooth  words,  but  in  the  power  of 
God,  as  Paul  says,  i  Cor.  ii.  4.  Thus,  as  before,  it  seems  to  me 
not  to  be  sufficient  that  one  apply  or  bring  forward  Scripture, 
but  it  is  also  important  that  one  understand  Scripture  correctly. 
With  that  in  view  perhaps  one  should  attend  to  such  matters  at 
the  universities  (as  at  Paris,  Cologne  or  Lyons,  or  elsewhere),  as  [ 
I  said  before. 

ANSWER    OF    MASTER    ULRICH. 

Sir  Vicar  :  There  is  no  further  need  of  such  smooth  and  round- 
about words.  I  desire  that  you  tell  me  only  with  what  portion  of 
Scripture  you  convinced  the  priest  imprisoned  at  Constance, 
clergyman  of  Fislisbach,  that  he  was  not  a  Christian,  and  brought 
him  to  a  revocation  of  his  error.  This  is  the  point  upon  which 
we  desire  to  hear  in  kindness  your  answer.  Show  us  simply 
where  in  the  books  heretofore  cited  by  you  in  the  matter  of 
praying  to  the  saints  and  of  their  intercession  it  is  stated  that 
they  are  our  mediators.  This  we  desire  to  know  from  you. 
Therefore  I  beg  you  for  the  sake  of  Christian  love,  do  this  with 
plain,  unadulterated,  divine  Scripture,  as  you  boast  to  have  done 
in  the  case  of  the  priest  imprisoned  at  Constance.  Indicate  the 
chapter  and  answer  the  question  as  asked  in  simple  words,  saying 
here  or  there  it  is  written.  Then  we  will  see  if  it  is  so,  and  in 
case  we  are  persuaded  and  convinced  of  it  we  will  gladly  submit 
to  instruction.  There  is  no  need  of  long  speeches.*  For  your 
long  quoting  and  citing  of  many  writings  of  the  ancients  looks 
more  like  seeking  the  praise  and  favor  of  the  audience  than  the 
furthering  of  the  truth.  Probably  I  also  could  bring  in  many 
narratives  and  essays  of  the  ancients,  but  it  is  not  to  the  point. 
We  well  know  that  many  things  were  decided   upon  in  times 

*  ["Upon  Fathers  and  councils  one  no  longer  depends,  unless  they  prove 
their  case  by  the  Scriptures."     (Bullinger.)] 


68  ZWINGU    SELECTIONS. 

past  by  the  fathers  in  council  assembled  which  were  afterward 
repealed  and  revoked  by  others  who  thought  they  assembled  in 
the  spirit  of  God,  as  is  plainly  found  in  the  Nicene  Council 
and  that  of  Gangra,*  in  the  first  of  which  the  clergy  was 
allowed  to  marry,  and  all  those  who  spoke  against  it  were  cursed, 
while  the  second  decided  upon  the  opposite.f  It  is  alsj  a  fact 
that  many  times  ordinances  (^constitiitiones)   have   been    issued 

*  [Held  in  the  4th  century.  Gangra  was  the  capital  of  ten  Asia  Minor 
provinces  of  Paphlagonia.] 

t  ["  '  Not  a  word  is  written  concerning  this  in  the  canons  of  the  council  of 
Nicgea.'  To  be  sure  Zwingli  said  that  Paphnutius  in  the  council  of  Nicsea  had 
been,  by  which  Zwingli  means  that  marriage  at  that  time  (although  he  partly  errs) 
was  permitted.  Now  in  the  council  of  Gangra  you  say  in  your  report  Zwingli  had 
said  it  had  been  forbidden.  How  could  you  lose  your  memory  in  such  fashion 
that  you  could  write  such  ?  On  the  contrary  he  said  that  it  had  been  permitted  in 
the  council  of  Gangra,  and  doubtlessly  he  based  this  upon  another  pamphlet , which 
he  called  'Apologeticum,'  and  written  in  Latin  quatering  (see  Latin  version). 
Rogo  nunc  ut  concilio  parendum,  etc.  You  do  him  wrong,  now  I  must  take  his 
part.  Furthermore  beware,  my  pamphlet  here  will  be  read  the  sooner  by  those 
who  are  at  Ziirich  and  accepted  as  good.  Zwingli  also  has  referred  to  the 
Carthaginian  council.  In  the  first  place  I  showed  how  there  are  two  kinds  of 
councils,  namely,  those  of  the  general  Christianity,  which  are  called  '  oecu- 
menica  '  or  '  universalia  '  in  Greek  and  Latin;  then  the  '  particularia.'  Now 
it  is  never  found  that  in  the  matter  of  faith  the  '  universalia  '  were  ever  opposed 
to  each  other.  The  Carthaginian  council  was  only  a  special  one.  And  to 
every  bishop  was  left  his  free  will  and  opinion;  and  only  later  the  council  of 
Nicsea  was  held  by  318  Fathers,  (thus)  they  may  have  had  an  honest  excuse. 
Why  have  you  omitted  this  report?"  (Faber.)  Heinrich  Wolf  answered 
thereupon :  "  Zwingli  simply  said  that  in  a  council  Paphnutius  with  difficulty 
had  secured  permission  for  the  marriage  of  the  priests,  also  spoke  well  against 
such  statutes.  Now  you  come  forward  and  say  that  he  placed  Paphnutius  in 
the  Nicaean  council,  although  he  said  to-day  (as  I  asked  him  about  it)  that  he 
had  never  read  about  a  council  which  had  forbidden  marriage,  but  about  popes 
500  years  after  the  birth  of  Christ.  But  since  the  papists  speak  so  consistently 
about  the  Nicaean  council  he  made  his  point,  how  he  really  had  never  read 
carefully  the  history  of  this  council,  and  thus  had  believed  you  papists.  And 
you  have  brought  forth  the  Nicsean  council,  and  not  Zwingli;  then  you  opposed 
the  Gangrensian  council  by  saying  that  it  was  not  a  general  one."  ("Gyren- 
rupfen.")] 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  69 

and  ordered  by  the  fathers  in  council  to  which  their  successors 
paid  no  heed.  For  example,  that  the  mother  of  God  conceived 
without  sin  was  decided  in  public  council  at  Basel,  and  yet  no 
preaching  monk  is  so  foolish  as  to  speak  against  it.  Also  many 
ordinances  or  rules  of  the  fathers  are  found  which  were  changed 
afterwards,  especially  in  our  times,  and  otherwise  not  kept  or 
given  up  by  the  influence  of  money,  so  that  such  things  are 
allowed  which  were  formerly  forbidden  by  the  fathers.  From 
this  we  can  see  that  councils  have  not  always  acted  in  the  spirit 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  but  sometimes  according  to  human  will  and 
judgment,  which  is  of  course  forbidden  by  divine  Scripture.  For 
the  Holy  Ghost  does  not  say  this  to-day  and  to-morrow  that, 
but  its  ordinances  and  regulations  must  remain  everlasting  and 
changeless.  The  pious  fathers  whom  we  call  holy  are  not  for 
that  reason  to  be  dishonored  and  attacked  as  to  their  piety  or 
holiness.  For  nothing  is  easier  or  from  native  weakness  more 
natural  than  to  err,  especially  when  out  of  conceit  or  over-hasty 
judgment  depended  upon  their  own  opinion  instead  of  upon 
the  rule  of  God's  Word.  This  all  shows  us  that  the  pillars  and 
supports  of  many  of  the  fathers,  as  Augustine  and  Jerome,  are 
not  in  harmony  in  their  writings;  that  often  the  one  thinks  not 
only  something  else,  but  by  Scripture  proves  the  contrary.  But 
as  to  the  fact  that  they  say  it  would  be  too  bad  if  we  Christians, 
and  especially  our  forefathers,  had  lived  so  long  in  error,  since 
from  the  time  of  Gregory  the  intercession  of  the  saints  has  been 
accepted  and  kept,  I  say  that  it  is  not  a  question  of  when  a  thing 
begun  in  the  Church.  We  know  well  that  the  litany  was  estab- 
lished in  the  time  of  Gregory  and  kept  down  to  the  present.  But 
all  we  desire  is  to  hear  the  Scripture  upon  which  my  Lord  Vicar 
bases  his  recommendation  that  we  should  pray  to  the  saints- 
For  if  such  a  custom  began  at  the  time  of  Gregory  then  it  did 
not  exist  before,*  and   if  before  that  time  men  were  Christians 

*  ["  I  said  even  more  about  the  time  further  back,  especially  in  the  time  of 
Cypiian,  1300  years  ago,  there  was  intercession  of  the  saints;  yes,  I  shall  try  il 
siill  furthfi- back."     (Faber.)] 


70  ZVVINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

and  were  saved,  though  they  did  not  hold  to  the  intercession  of 
the  saints,  and  perhaps  knew  little  of  it,  then  it  follows  that  they 
did  not  sin  who  believed  in  Christ  alone  and  did  not  consider 
the  intercession  of  the  saints. 

For  we  know  really  from  the  Scriptures  that  Jesus  Christ  alone 
is  the  mediator  between  us  and  God,  his  heavenly  Father,  as  has 
been  stated  before.  Furthermore,  I  say  that  many  learned  men 
have  spoken  and  fought  against  the  ordinances,  and  especially 
against  the  so-called  holy  ones,  useless  and  superfluous  customs, 
also  against  great  power  and  tyrannical  show;  but  the  great 
moguls,  popes,  bishops,  monks  and  prelates,  do  not  wish  to  be 
touched  on  their  sore  spots,  and  tell  the  unlearned  crowd  that 
their  rule  has  been  erected  by  God,  and  that  He  has  ordered 
them  to  govern  thus,  hence  all  those  opposing,  or  only  having 
such  thoughts,  are  not  alone  heretics  and  shut  out  from  the  rest 
of  Christianity,  but  as  cursed  and  the  property  of  the  devil  they 
have  been  exiled,  outlawed,  condemned,  and  some  have  been 
sentenced  to  the  stake  and  burnt.  Therefore,  dear  brethren, 
although  one  says  to  you — perhaps  in  order  to  frighten  you  the 
more — how  our  pious  parents  and  ancestors  have  erred,  and  on 
account  of  such  heresy  have  been  deprived  of  salvation  :  I  tell 
you  (on  the  contrary)  that  the  decisions  and  judgment  of  God 
are  hidden  from  mankind  and  incomprehensible  to  us,  and  no 
one  should  impiously  concern  himself  therewith.  God  know^s 
that  we  all  have  faults  and  are  sinners,  yet  through  His  mercy  He 
makes  up  our  deficiences  and  enables  us  to  accomplish  something, 
yea  even  such  deeds  for  which  perhaps  our  strength  alone  is  not 
sufficient.  Consequently  it  is  in  no  wise  befitting  that  we  desire 
to  judge  and  pronounce  upon  the  secrecy  of  God  in  such  mat- 
ters. He  knows  full  well  where  He  may  overlook  and  pardon, 
and  we  must  not  interfere  with  His  decision  and  compassion,  in 
which  manner  He  has  treated  and  dealt  with  each  one.  We 
trust  in  Him  as  our  eternally  good  Father,  who  can,  as  2  Peter  ii. 
9  says,  well  protect  His  own,  and  deliver  the   godless   over   to 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  7 1 

eternal  suffering.  Nor  does  it  do  any  good  to  say  that  there  are  few- 
people  who  will  not  feel  comfort  through  the  intercession  of  the 
saints.  I  say,  where  such  help  comes  from  God,  we  will  not 
judge  why  God  acts  thus  and  helps  man  in  such  fashion  as  He 
desires.  But  where  this  occurs  from  infatuation  by  the  devil  as 
a  judgment  of  God  upon  the  unbelieving  man,  what  shall  we  say 
then?  Ye  know, well  what  work  the  devil  has  sometimes  done 
in  many  places,  which  if  it  had  not  been  obstructed  would  have 
resulted  in  great  deception  and  injury  of  all  Christendom. 
Furthermore,  that  is  an  evil  teaching  which  proclaims  that  other 
nations  will  not  consider  us  Chritsians  if  we  do  not  obey  the 
ordinances,  /.  e.,  the  laws  of  former  times,  as  this  is  ordered  and 
demanded  by  the  papal  decrees.  For  -indeed  there  are  many 
ordinances  in  the  canons  of  the  Roman  bishops  and  popes  which 
the  aforesaid  nations  do  not  obey  and  still  they  are  none  the  less 
Christians.  Concerning  the  above  I  shall  make  use  of  the  follow- 
ing short  comparison  :  Ecclesiastical  property  is  (as  they  say)  in 
the  power  of  the  Roman  pope,  and  he  may  bestow  and  grant  the 
estates  to  whomsoever  he  pleases.  Now  look  ye  how  this  ord- 
inance is  obeyed  in  Spain  and  France ;  there  the  ecclesiastical 
benefices  or  estates  are  not  granted  to  any  foreigner,  let  the 
pope  say  what  he  pleases.  But  we  foolish  Germans  must  permit 
the  sending  of  stablemen  and  mule-drivers  from  the  papal  court 
to  take  possession  of  our  benefices  and  curacies  and  be  our 
spiritual  guides,  although  they  are  ignorant  of  and  know  naught 
concerning  the  Scriptures,  and  if  we  do  not  tolerate  this  we  are 
disobedient  to  the  Christian  Church.  But  the  above-mentioned 
nations  do  not  obey  the  ordinance  and  still  are  without  question 
pious  Christians.  Hence,  Sir  Vicar,  I  desire  that  you  do  not 
make  use  of  bombastic  speeches,  which  do  not  even  bear  upon 
my  question,  but,  as  I  have  asked  before,  tell  at  once  where  is 
written  in  the  Scriptures  concerning  the  holy  invocation  and 
intercession  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  as  you  pretended  you  could  show 
in  Exodus,  Baruch,  etc.     That  is  what  we  desire  to  hear.     Hence 


72  ZWINGLI    SELECnONS. 

answer  in  regard  to  this  obscure  point.  We  do  not  ask  what 
has  been  accomplished  or  decided  in  this  or  that  council.  This 
all  does  not  bear  upon  the  matters  which  we  ask  you,  otherwise 
we  will  be  speaking  for  a  month  concerning  these  matters. 

VICAR. 

Gentlemen  :  I  am  accused  of  speaking  very  evasively  and  not 
to  the  point,  I  have  excused  myself  before  for  not  being  able 
to  speak  eloquently,  and  I  have  also  listened  to  you  (Master 
Ulrich).  [Here  Master  Uliich  interrupted  ;  There  is  no  need  of 
so  much  teasing.]  That  you  accuse  me  of  seeking  to  add  to  my 
own  fame  rather  than  the  advancement  of  truth  I  cannot  pre- 
vent. I  wished  to  assist  in  making  peace  and  doing  the  best. 
But  when  Master  Ulrich  claims  that  I  say  much  concerning  things 
settled  by  councils  of  yore,  and  then  changed  by  later  ones,  I  say 
that  there  are  two  kinds  of  councils  referred  to.  Some  are  known 
as  "  concilia  universalia  "  (these  are  common  or  general  gather^ 
ings),  where  many  of  the  bishops  and  Christian  leaders  meet,  as 
in  the  four  foremost  councils,  Nicaea,  Constantinople,  Ephesus 
and  Chalcedon,  and  some  others.  Whatever  was  accomplished 
and  done  in  these  has  never  been  entirely  changed  by  the  others, 
but  has  been  preserved  like  the  Gospel.  Some  are  known  as 
"concilia  particularia,"  of  which  there  have  been  many,  not  con- 
sisting of  all  the  fathers  of  the  common  parishes  about,  but  of 
special  ones,  as  was  the  council  of  Gangra,  and  many  otheis. 
In  these  probably  something  has  at.  times  been  settled  which  later, 
perhaps  not  without  cause,  has  been  decided  otherwise.  But  it 
never  has  been  that  the  priests  were  permitted  to  have  wives. 
And  although  the  Eastern  Church,  especially  in  Greece,  wished 
to  have  this  considered  just,  the  pious  fathers  of  other  nations 
would  not  permit  this  and  forbade  it,  considering  from  weighty 
reasons  *    that    the    marriage    of    priests    is    detrimental  to  the 

♦  ["Although  I  said  that  I  waJited  to  defend  it  well  against  the  destroyers  of 
divine  gifts  and  services.  But  I  did  not  say  it.  You  thought  I  would  say  ii. 
Although  I  did  not  think  of  the  pope,  ttie  ceremonies  and  many  other  things,, 
it  is  no  proof  that  such  are  useless."     iFaber.)] 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  73 

churches  and  not  for  the  gDod  of  the  service  of  God,  as  also 
Saint  Paul  says,  i  Cor.  vii.  32:  "Qui  sine  uxore,"  etc.  "He 
that  is  unmarried  careth  for  the  things  that  belong  to  the  Lord.'* 
vii.  27  :  "  Solutus  es  ab,"  etc.  "Art  thou  loosed  from  a  wife? 
seek  not  a  wife  !"  There  he  speaks  of  those  who  serve  the 
Gospel  as  priests.  Id.  vii.  20  :  "  Let  every  man  abide  in  the 
same  caUing  wherein  he  was  called."  Such  and  many  other 
causes  have  induced  the  holy  fathers  not  to  allow  and  permit 
marriage  to  priests.  Indeed  it  could  not  happen  without  parti- 
tion of  the  property  of  the  churches. 

ZWINGLI. 

Marriage  forbidden  to  priests  is  not  found  everywhere,  as  one 
pretends,  but  imposed  by  man  contrary  to  a  divine  and  just  law. 
This  is  evident,  first  of  all,  in  St.  Paul,  i  Cor.  vii.  2  :  "  Neverthe- 
less, to  avoid  fornication,  let  every  man  have  his  own  wife,  and 
let  every  woman  have  her  own  husband."  Since  he  says  "  every  " 
undoubtedly  he  does  not  wish  the  priests  to  be  excluded.  For 
he  confirms  and  refers  to  the  marriage  of  priests,  especially  in 
writing  to  i  Timothy  iii.  2  [4]  :  "A  bishop  (/.  ^.,  priest)  then  must 
be  blameess,  the  husband  of  one  wife,  vigilant,  sober,  of  good 
behavior,  given  to  hospitality,  apt  to  teach,  etc.  One  that  ruleth 
well  his  own  house,  having  his  children  in  subjection  in  all 
gravity."  In  the  same  fashion  he  speaks,  iii.  8,  concerning  the 
deacon,  whom  we  call  evangelist.  And  Paul  also  writes  to  Titus 
i.  5,  6  :  "For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldest 
set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  elders  (whom 
we  call  priests  or  deacons)  in  every  city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee  : 
If  any  be  blameless,  the  husband  of  one  wife,  having  faithful 
children,"  etc.  Undoubtedly  the  holy  Paul,  inspired  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  recognized  our  inability  and  incapacity  to  remain  chaste 
by  our  own  will  except  through  the  grace  of  God.  Hence  he 
says  in  the  afore-mentioned  place,  i  Cor.  vii.  7  :  "  For  I  would 
that  all  men  were  even  as  I  myself,"  and  i.  i.:  "It  would  be 
6 


74  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

good  for  man  to  be  thus,"  but  Paul  adds,  vii.  7,  and  says :  "  Put 
every  man  hath  his  proper  gift  of  God,  one  after  this  manner 
and  another  after  that."  Therefore  Paul  places  no  restriction 
upon  the  marriage  of  priests,  and  indeed  writes  expressly :  "A 
bishop  (/.  e.,  priest)  and  a  deacon  shall  have  a  sober  wife  and 
well-bred  children;"  and  furthermore  he  permits  marriage  to  all 
people,  and  says,  i  Cor.  vii.  28,  7  :  "  But  and  if  thou  marry  thou 
hast  not  sinned.  But  every  man  hath  his  proper  gift  of  God," 
etc.  It  is  evident  from  this  that  marriage  is  not  forbidden  to 
priests  by  divine  law,  and  that  chastity  is  to  be  maintained,  not 
by  means  of  our  resolutions,  but  with  the  help  of  the  grace  of 
God.  This  real  truth  and  wisdom  of  God  Christ  also  proves  to 
Bs,  Matt.  xix.  10,  12  :  "His  disciples  say  unto  him,  if  the  case 
of  the  man  be  so  with  his  wife  it  is  not  good  to  marry.  But 
he  said  unto  them,  all  men  cannot  receive  this  saying  save  they 
to  whom  it  is  given.  And  there  be  eunuchs  which  have  made 
themselves  eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven's  sake  (that  is, 
due  to  the  evangelical  doctrine).  He  that  is  able  to  receive  it 
let  him  receive  it !"  Do  you  hear  that  Christ  says  here  that  it  is 
not  possible  for  all  people  to  keep  chastity  except  such  as  have 
received  it  from  God?  Hence  He  does  not  forbid  the  twelve 
apostles  to  marry.  Nor  did  God  in  vain  give  Adam  a  woman  as 
helpmate ;  He  could  have  given  him  a  man  as  helpmate  if  He 
Irad  wished  to  keep  him  chaste.  But  He  said  :  '•  Crescite  et 
multiplicamini !"  And  although  this  is  known  to  every  one,  still 
the  pope  is  able,  by  means  of  his  ordinance,  to  demand  from 
each  priest  or  other  ecclesiastic  chastity  and  that  he  be  unmarried 
contrary  to  divine  law,  and  he  can  weigh  down  the  poor  con- 
sciences corrupted  by  sin  and  shame ;  and  he  permits  public 
offense  and  sin  contrary  to  the  sunny  and  pure  ordinance  of 
God.  I  say  that  I  know  of  no  greater  scandal  in  Christendom 
than  that  marriage  is  forbidden  to  priests  (I  am  speaking  about 
the  pastors  ;  the  others  let  them  lie,  whatever  they  do),  yet  they  are 
allowed  to  commit  fornication  publicly  as  long  as  thev  give  money. 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  75 

They  pretend  that  if  the  priests  had  wives  the  property  of  the 
Qhurches  would  be  divided  and  disappear.  My  God,  what  sort 
of  a  reason  is  this?  Do  we  then  never  spend  the  property  of 
the  churches  uselessly?  We  will  our  real  and  movable  property 
to  the  illegitimate  wives  and  children,  if  we  have  any,  contrary 
to  God's  will.  What  would  that  harm  the  benefice  if  a  priest 
had  a  dear  wife  and  well-bred  children  brought  up  for  the  service 
of  God  oui:  of  the  benefice?  The  benefice  could  retain  its 
property  and  income,  which  it  has,  although  the  priests  may  at 
times  have  mismanaged.  Priests  have  not  always  been  forbidden 
to  many.  This  is  proved  by  Pelagius,*  in  which  is  found  a  decree 
of  the  pope  (Diss.  XXXI.,  cap.  ante  trienn.)  that  the  subdeacons 
of  Sicily  shall  forsake  their  wives,  which  the^y  had  taken  in  accord- 
ance with  the  divine  ordinance,  and  shall  not  have  intercourse 
with  them ;  which  statute  Gregory  I.  later  on  rescinded.  Con- 
sequently if  it  was  ordered  in  former  times  by  Pelagius  that  priests 
shall  have  no  wives,  and  this  was  rescinded  by  Gregory,  then 
it  could  not  always  have  been  as  at  present,  but  the  law  must 
have  been  made  by  man,  which  God  never  required  to  be  kept. 

VICARIUS. 

It  has  never  happened  since  the  time  of  Tertullian  and  the 
council  of  Nicsea,  1200  years  ago,  that  priests  had  wives  or  were 
allowed  to  have  them 

Thereupon  one  of  the  council  at  Zurich  said  :  But  they  are 
allowed  to  have  mistresses. 

The  vicar  was  astonished  for  a  while,  but  resumed  :  It  is  true 
that  the  subdeacons  in  Sicily  who  had  taken  wives  previously 
contrary  to  the  custom  of  the  Roman  churches  were  permitted 
by  the  aforesaid  Gregory  to  keep  them.     But  only  on  the  condi- 

*  Alvarus  Pelagius,  bishop  of  Silves,  Portugal,  d.  at  Seville,  1352,  whose 
Summa  de planctu  Ecclesia  ("  The  Chief  Points  of  the  Church's  Complaint  "), 
written  in  1332,  published,  Ulm  1474,  Venice  1560,  is  a  frank  statement  of 
the  disorders  of  his  time  and  a  plea  for  the  exaltation  of  the  Papal  See. 


76  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

tion  that  in  future  no  one  would  be  consecrated  who  would  not 
pledge  himself  to  remain  unmarried  and  chaste.  Thus  also  it 
was  resolved  in  the  council  at  Carthage  that  no  bishop,  priest  or 
deacon  should  have  intercourse  with  women,  but  remain  chaste 
without  wife.  Hence  I  say  that  it  will  be  no  easy  matter  to 
show  that  marriage  was  ever  permitted  to  priests.* 

ZWINGLI. 

And  even  if  you  say  since  the  time  of  the  apostles,  still  mar- 
riage is  not  forbidden  to  priests  by  divine  ordinance,  but  allowed 

*  ["Don't  you  recollect  that  I  said  I  do  not  like  to  speak  concerning  the 
marriage  of  priests?  On  account  of  this  I  have  kept  quiet  and  have  omitted 
to  state  a  better  reason.  But  where  have  you  hidden  the  fact  that  I  said  that 
from  the  time  of  the  apostles  one  does  not  read  that  one  who  was  consecrated 
as  subdeacon,  deacon,  priest  or  bishop  could  marry  again  after  his  wife 
had  died?  Did  I  not  say  further  that  it  is  thus  understood,  not  alone  in  the 
Western,  but  also  in  the  Eastern  Church — in  Crete,  Corcyra,  etc.,  also  in  India, 
in  the  case  of  the  Presbyter  John,  and  among  the  Russians?  so  that  any  one  who 
took  a  \'irgin  as  wife  may  be  consecrated  as  priest,  but  that  if  she  die  that  he 
can  take  no  more;  in  the  same  manner  if  he  has  no  wife  before  he  is  conse- 
crated he  can  take  none  after  the  consecration;  this  I  have  shown.  Why  do 
you  omit  this?  It  was  indeed  necessary  for  you  to  include  the  subtile» 
honorable  interruption  of  one  who  spoke  about  the  prostitutes;  and  you 
also  placed  Gutschenkel  t  as  a  character  in  the  comedy.  Since  the  good 
Master  Ulrich  consoles  himself  much  in  his  speeches  and  writings  with  a 
text  which  he  found  in  XXVII.  dist.  c,  '  Si  quis  discernit,'  which  is  claimed 
to  have  been  made  in  Gangrensian  council,  know  then  that  there  were  not 
more  than  i6  bishops  in  that  council;  these  made  19  canons  against  the 
majority  that  even  desired  to  abolish  holy  marriage.  But  therein  they  did  not 
reject  the  state  of  virginity  and  widowhood,  hence  also  the  marriage  of  priests 
was  not,  as  you  think,  admitted  Ijy  the  pious  Fathers.  They  spoke  about  the  . 
priests  who  had  wives  before  the  consecration — and  bethink  yourself  what 
councils  over  18  bishops  would  prefer,  even  although  they  should  prefer  it 
were  so,  as  it  is  not,  as  Zwingli  says.  Now  see  how  the  supplication  issued  by 
your  and  our  common  gracious  lord  of  Constance  shall  be  answered.  About 
the  marriage  of  priests  I  do  not  like  to  speak  (several  times  repeated).  Accu- 
sations of  two  wrong  quotations  were  made."      (P'aber.)] 

+  The  half-witted  fellow  mentioned  above. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  77 

and  permitted,  as  I  have  proved  before.  And  that  priests 
formerly  had  wives  is  sufficiently  evident,  since  formerly  many 
sons  of  priests  have  become  popes  and  bishops,  which  could  not 
have  happened  if  they  had  not  been  born  in  wedlock.  How  is 
it  that  one  alwa)^s  prefers  human  laws  and  human  meddling,  and 
always  sets  human  traditions  above  the  will  of  God?  Although 
one  finds  that  also  the  fathers  have  protested  against  many  ordi- 
nances, and  you  know  how  vehemently  the  pious  man  Paphnutius  * 
opposed  such  a  statute  and  would  not  agree  to  marriage  being 
forbidden  to  priests.  Furthermore,  Eusebius  writes  that  some  of 
the  apostles  had  their  wives  with  them,  which  facts  are  sufficient 
indications  that  the  present  custom  was  begun  by  people  of  later 
times,  but  that  marriage  was  not  forbidden  by  divine  ordinance 
either  to  layman  or  priest.  And  although  in  the  council  of 
Nicsea,  as  you  say,  it  was  forbidden  to  priests  to  have  wives,  still 
what  about  that?  In  former  times  baptism  by  heretics  was 
considered  by  many  fathers  as  just  and  valid,  as  Cyprianus  tells 
us,  but  later  in  the  council  at  Carthage  this  was  declared  to  be 
worthless  and  was  set  aside. 

To  such  varied  arguments  of  Master  Ulrich  the  vicar  had 
nothing  more  to  oppose  and  say,  except  in  regard  to  the  baptism 
by  heretics,  and  that  on  account  of  the  following  reasons  :  Master 
Ulrich  has  said  that  the  baptism  of  heretics  was  considered  valid 

♦Bishop  of  a  city  in  Upper  Thebais;  had  his  right  eye  gouged  out  and  his 
left  knee-cap  injured  in  the  Maximian  persecution  (305),  and  was  banished  to 
the  mines.  He  appeared  in  the  Nicene  Council  325,  and  was  honored  as  a 
confessor.  "When  it  was  proposed  to  enact  a  law  which  forbade  the  married 
clergy  to  continue  to  live  with  their  wives,  Paphnutius  declared  very  earnestly 
that  so  heavy  a  yoke  ought  not  to  be  laid  upon  the  clergy;  that  marriage  itself 
is  honorable  and  the  bed  undefiled;  that  the  Church  ought  not  to  be  injured 
by  an  undue  severity.  "  For  all  men,"  said  he,  "cannot  bear  the  practice  of 
rigid  continence;  neither  perhaps  would  the  chastity  of  the  wife  be  preserved." 
He  favored  dissuading  clergymen  from  marrying  after  ordination,  but  allownng 
those  who  had  married  prior  to  ordination  to  retain  their  wives.  His  own 
known  virginity  and  his  sufferings  for  the  cause  gave  so  great  weight  to  his 
words  that  he  was  unanimously  sustained  by  the  Council. 


78  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

by  several,  and  thus  referring  to  Cyprianus.  But  the  vicar 
demanded  that  one  should  record  the  words  of  Master  Ulrich, 
because  he  believes  he  may  catch  him  in  small  matters,  for  Master 
Ulrich  may  not  have  been  very  careful  in  the  use  of  his  words. 
Therefore  he  also  demands  that  a  copy  of  Cyprianus  should  be 
brought,  so  that  the  dispute  may  be  decided.  But  the  vicar 
said  :  Supposing  the  words  of  Cyprianus  are  as  I  think,  and  not 
as  you?  And  thereupon  a  quarrel  arose,  which  had  naught  to  do 
with  the  questions  which  the  vicar  had  been  called  upon  so  often 
to  answer.  Therefore  I  have  not  taken  pains  to  remember  and 
note  this.  But  if  I  understood  the  matter  both  were  right.  For 
Zwingli  referred  to  those  who  had  been  baptized  by  heretics, 
who  should,  according  to  Cyprianus,  be  baptized  again  in  the 
churches,  which  several  thought  was  needless.  But  the  vicar  was 
speaking  of  those  who  once  baptized  by  Christians  had  gone  over 
to  heresy  and  larer  on  wished  to  reenter  the  Christian  Church ; 
these  did  not  need  another  baptism,  but  merely  absolution  by  the 
imposition  of  hands,  etc.  Several  were,  however,  also  opposed  to 
this,  as  Cyprianus  writes  in  his  letters  to  Pompeius  and  to  Quintinus. 
After  there  had  been  considerable  talk  concerning  this  matter, 
Dr.  Sebastian  Hofmann,*  of  Schaffhausen,  a  member  of  the  order 
of  the  Barefoot  Monks,  spoke  thus :   Learned,  spiritual,  honor- 

*  He  was  properly  called  Sebastian  Hofmeister,  or  in  the  scholastic  form 
Oikonomos.  Because  his  father  was  a  "  wagner,"  i.  e.,  wheelwright,  he  was 
himself  erroneously  called  Wagner,  or  in  Latinized  form  Carpentarius.  He 
was  born  at  Schaffhausen  in  1476;  entered  the  Barefoot  (Franciscan)  monks 
there;  studied  in  Paris  the  classical  tongues  and  Hebrev/,  and  came  home  in 
1520  as  a  Doctor  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures,  and  the  same  year  he  taught  in  the 
Franciscan  monastery  in  Zurich  and  so  came  in  contact  with  Zwingli.  He 
embraced  the  Reformation,  and  introduced  it  into  Lucerne  and  into  Schaff- 
hausen (both  1523),  whither  persecution  drove  him.  It  is  indeed  as  the  Re- 
former of  Schaffhausen  that  he  is  best  remembered,  yet  his  career  there  was 
brief,  for  in  1525  he  had  to  leave  that  city.  He  preached  in  Zurich  (1526) 
and  taught  Hebrew  in  Bern  (1528),  but  died  September  26,  1533,  as  preacher 
at  Zofingen,  thirty  miles  sontheast  of  Basel.  Two  of  his  writings  were  com- 
monly attributed  to  Zwingli. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  79 

able,  wise,  favorable,  gracious,  dear  gentlemen,  it  is  necessary 
that  I  also  speak  in  this  matter.  Last  year  I  was  lector  at 
'  Lucerne,  where,  according  to  my  best  knowledge  and  belief,  I 
preached,  as  I  hope  and  know,  nothing  else  except  the  word  of 
God  from  the  Scriptures,  and  in  these  sermons  at  Lucerne  I  have 
mentioned,  like  many  others,  the  many  useless  customs  of  inter- 
cession and  invoking  of  the  saints  and  the  mother  of  God,  and  I 
taught  in  accordance  with  the  contents  and  teachings  of  the 
holy  Scriptures.  On  account  of  such  sermons,  made,  as  stated 
above,  at  Lucerne,  various  accusations  against  me  were  sent  to 
Constance,  among  which  was  the  sermon  about  the  invocation  of 
the  saints.  I  was  accused  of  being  a  heretic,  condemned,  and 
therefore  driven  out  of  Lucerne.  And  now  as  my  lord,  the  vicar, 
has  pretended  before  and  stated  that  the  appeal  and  invocation 
of  saints  is  founded  upon  the  Scriptures  and  mentioned  in  the 
Old  Testament,  I  pray  for  God's  sake  that  the  vicar,  as  he  was 
wont  to  boast  to  have  overcome  the  priest  imprisoned  at  Con- 
stance, show  the  place,  as  formerly  often  had  been  asked  of  him, 
especially  since  on  account  of  this  I  have  been  accused  by  my 
gracious  lord  at  Constance  of  being  a  heretic,  and  I  will  accept 
it  with  many  thanks  and  willingly  allow  myself  to  be  taught  in 
case  I  have  perchance  erred  in  my  sermons,  have  not  told  the 
truth,  or  have  misread  or  misunderstood  the  Scriptures. 

ZWINGLI. 

We  know  from  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  of  God  that  our 

only  comforter,  redeemer,  savior  and  mediator  with  God  is  Jesus 

Christ,  in  whom  and  through  whom  alone  we  can  obtain  grace, 

help  and  salvation,  and  besides  from  no  other  being  in  heaven  or 

~"~on  earth. 

THE  VICAR,  LAUGHING. 

I  well  know  that  Jesus  Christ  alone  is  the  comfort,  redemption 
and  salvation  of  all,  and  an  intercessor  and  mediator  between  us 
and  God,  his  heavenly  Father,  the  highest  round  by  which  alone 


8o  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

is  an  approach  to  the  throne  of  divine  grace  and  charity,  accord- 
ing to  Heb.  iv.  i6.  Nevertheless  one  may  perhaps  attain  the 
highest  round  by  means  of  the  lower.*  It  seems  to  me  the  dear 
saints  and  the  Virgin  Mary  are  not  to  be  despised,  since  there 
are  few  who  have  not  felt  the  intercession  of  the  Virgin  and  the 
saints.  I  do  not  care  what  every  one  says  or  believes.  I  have 
placed  a  ladder  against  heaven ;  I  believe  firmly  in  the  interces- 
sion of  the  much-praised  queen  of  heaven,  the  mother  of  God, 
and  another  may  believe  or  hold  what  he  pleases. 

ZWINGLI. 

That  would  indeed  be  a  foolish  piece  of  business  if  one  could 
arrive  at  the  highest  round  without  the  lower  or  without  work,  or 
if  he  were  on  it  to  begin  at  the  lowest.  Sir  Vicar,  we  do  not 
dispute  here  concerning  how  one  should  appeal  to  the  saints  or 
what  your  belief  is.  We  desire  only  that  you  show  us  it  in  the 
Gospel,  as  has  been  formerly  often  demanded  and  begged  of  you. 

Thereupon  Master  Leo  Jud  t  arose  and  spoke  thus  :  Gracious* 
careful,  honorable,  wise,  favorable,  dear  gentlemen,  I  have  been 
made  by  you,  gentlemen,  here  at  Zurich,  a  people's  priest  and 

*  ["  I  said,  one  may  do  that.  '  Must '  and  '  can,'  are  they  not  two  different 
things?  The  debate  was  not  about  'must,'  but  about  'can.'  Did  you  not 
hear  from  me  about  the  ladder  of  Jacob  fastened  to  heaven  on  which  are  many 
rounds?  Did  you  not  hear  how  quickly  and  speedily  Zwingli  wished  to  swing 
himself  up  to  the  cross  of  Christ?  Do  you  not  think  if  he  wished  to  go  to  the 
Lord  on  the  cross  that  then  rightly  he  would  also  have  found  Mary,  John  and 
the  other  people  of  the  Gospel?"     (Faber.)] 

tBorn  at  Gemar,  near  Rappoltsweilen  (or  Ribeauville ) ,  Elsass,  thirty  miles 
southwest  of  Strassburg,  the  child  of  a  clerical  marriage,  1482;  studied  at 
Basel;  inclined  first  to  pharmacy,  but  took  up  theology,  and  had  Zwingli  as 
his  fellow-student  under  Thomas  Wyttenbach;  M.  A.,  1506;  became  deacon 
of  St.  Theodore's  church,  Basel;  pastor  of  St.  Pilt,  four  miles  east  of  his  birth- 
place; people's  priest  at  Einsiedeln  in  succession  to  Zwingli,  and  at  his  sugges- 
tion, 1518;  the  same,  and  by  the  same  influence,  at  St.  Peter's,  Zurich,  1522; 
coadjutor  of  Zwingli  and  Bullinger,  particularly  remembered  as  principal  trans- 
lator of  the  Zurich  Bible;  died  in  Zurich,  June  19,  1542. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  8 1 

pastor,  perhaps  unwisely,  in  order  to  proclaim  to  you  the  word  of 
God,  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  which  I  shall  try  to  do  according  to 
my  best  capabilities,  in  as  far  as  the  grace  of  God  will  assist  me 
and  the  Holy  Ghost  aid  me.  But  surely  now  many  ordinances  of 
man  have  been  retained  from  long  habit  in  the  churches,  and  have 
intermingled  with  the  Gospel,  so  that  the  clergy  frequently  have 
preached  and  commanded  their  keeping  equally  with  the  Gospel : 
yet  I  now  declare  that  I  shall  not  obey  such  human  ordinances, 
but  shall  present  and  teach  from  love  the  joyful  and  pure 
Gospel,  and  whatever  I  can  really  prove  from  the  Scriptures, 
regardless  of  human  ordinance  or  old  traditions,  since  such 
human  ordinances,  decreed  by  pope  or  bishop,  have  been 
here  recognized  and  proved  to  be  by  the  Articles  *  emanating 
from  Master  Uliich  to  be  entirely  opposed  to  the  Gospel  and 
truth,  and  still  there  is  no  one  here  who  desires  or  is  able  to  say 
anything  truthful  or  fundamental  against  him.  And  so  although 
my  Sir  Vicar  has  pretended  to  prgve  and  show  by  means  of  the 
Gospel  the  invocation  and  intercession  of  the  saints,  such  has  not 
yet  been  done,  although  frequently  requested.  Therefore  I  also 
pray  to  hear  and  to  know  from  him  where  it  is  written  in  the 
afore-mentioned  biblical  books  concerning  the  invocation  and 
intercession  of  the  saints.  For  perhaps  also  in  my  sermons,  if 
God  lends  me  grace,  it  will  be  declared  and  proclaimed  that  one 
should  invoke  to  Jesus  Christ  alone,  and  only  look  to  him  for  all 
compassion,  all  help,  mercy  and  salvation,  which  shall  be  sought 
and  demanded  from  no  other  being.  Therefore,  Sir  Vicar,  I 
desire  that  you  teach  me  if  I  have  erred,  and  report  from  the 
Gospel,  showing  place  and  location  where  it  is  written  that  the 
saints  are  to  be  invoked  by  us  or  that  they  are  intercessors. 
Such  I  shall  receive  with  many  thanks,  and  will  gladly  allow 
myself  to  be  taught  by  you. 

*  Referring  to  the   Sixty-seven   Articles  issued  by  Zwingli  for  the  basis  of 
argument  in  the  Disputation. 


82  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

VICAR. 

Ne  Hercules  quidem  contra  duos.  Shall  I  strive  with  two? 
That  was  considered  even  too  difficult  for  the  strong  Hercules 
(according  to  a  proverb  of  the  ancients).  Dear  Sir,  I  have 
nothing  to  do  with  you. 

Leo :   But  I  have  something  to  do  with  you. 

Vicar :   I  do  not  know  who  you  are. 

Leo  :   I  shall  gladly  be  your  good  friend  in  so  far  as  you  desire. 

Vicar :  That  I  shall  not  refuse,  for  I  am  not  here  to  become 
an  enemy  of  any  one.  If  you  are  then  my  good  friend,  as  you 
say,  it  will  happen  to  us  as  to  Socrates,  and  Solon,*  who  also 
through  argumentation  became  good  friends. 

Leo  :  Then  you  have  one  friend  more  than  formerly. 

To  prevent  such  and  other  gibes  Master  Ulrich  began  to  speak  : 
Would  to  God  that  the  saying,  Ne  Hercules  quidem,  etc.,  would 
be  understood  and  followed  as  readily  by  some  as  it  ordinarily 
is  the  custom  to  quote  it.  Sir  Vicar,  we  desire  to  hear  the 
quotation  concerning  the  invocation  and  intercession  of  the 
saints,  not  such  useless  talk  and  nonsense. 

VICAR. 

It  is  the  custom  and  usage  of  Christian  churches,  and  is  kept  thus 
by  all  Christian  folk  confirmed  by  the  litany  and  the  canons  missal, 

*["Look,  how  can  you  say  that  to  excuse  myself  I  quoted  in  the 
beginning  the  saying  of  Solon,  how  then  it  was  written  by  the  wise  man 
Solon  that  when  once  he  was  sitting  with  scholars,  who  were  debating, 
and  Periander  asked  him  whether  he  was  silent  from  lack  of  words  or  because 
he  was  a  fool,  he  answered  no  fool  can  keep  quiet?  Therefore  I  did  not  refer 
to  Socrates  (as  you  say),  but  to  the  saying  of  Xenocrates  when  he  was  one 
time  asked  why  he  alone  kept  still  and  allowed  all  the  others  to  speak,  he  had 
answered  that  what  I  sometimes  said  I  regretted,  but  that  which  I  have  not 
said  that  I  have  never  regretted.  Thus  it  happened,  and  not  otherwise,  and 
as  a  witness  of  the  truth  I  cited  the  proverb:  Audiens  sapiens  sapientior  erit. 
And  as  another  witness  Zwingli  interrupted  the  speech  by  saying  that  there  was 
no  need  of  fawning  and  hypocritical  style.  Now  look  how  you  have  hit  it?" 
(Fal)er.)] 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  83 

that  we  appeal  to  the  Virgin  to  intercede  for  us  ;  this  the  mother  of 
God  herself  says  in  the  gospel  of  St.  Luke.  Ex  hoc  beatam  me 
dicent :  "All  generations  shall  call  me  blessed,"  and  her  cousin 
Elizabeth  addressed  her  in  a  friendly  manner,  saying  :  Unde  mihi 
hoc,  etc."  And  whence  is  this  to  me,  that  the  mother  of  my  Lord 
should  come  to  me?"  Likewise,  "  blessed  art  thou  among  women," 
etc.  This  also  the  maiden  in  the  Gospel  proves  to  us,  who  cries  : 
*'  Blessed  is  the  body  which  has  borne  thee,  and  blessed  the  breasts 
which  thou  hast  sucked."  [Interruption  by  ZwingH  :  We  are  not 
asking  concerning  the  holiness  and  dignity  of  Mary,  but  concern- 
ing invocation  and  intercession.]  We  also  sing  daily :  Sentiunt 
omnes  tuum  levamen.  "  All  feel  thy  aid  who  honor  thy  mem- 
ory. "*  But  since  my  talk  is  held  to  t)e  useless  and  foolish  I 
will  rather  keep  still. 

Thus  the  vicar  kept  still  and  sat  down,  and  then  Doctor  Martin 
from  Tubingen  arose,  and  spoke  thus  concerning  these  matters : 

Dear  Sirs :  Much  has  been  said  here  against  the  usage  and 
ordinance  of  the  Christian  churches  which  has  been  decreed  and 
ordered  by  holy  councils  and  fathers  assembled  in  the  name  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  which,  moreover,  long  has  been  held  without 
fault  as  a  praised  custom  and  long  usage.  To  oppose  and  to 
object  to  it  is  a  sacrilegious  deed,  for  what  has  been  decreed  and 
resolved  by  the  holy  councils  and  fathers,  namely,  by  the  four 
councils,  should  be  obeyed  in  Christian  churches  like  the  Gospel, 
as  we  have  written  in  Diss.  XV.  For  the  Church  assembled  in 
council  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Ghost  cannot  err.  Therefore 
it  behooves  no  one  to  speak  against  their  decrees  and  ordinances, 
as  Christ  bears  witness  in  the  holy  Gospel  when  he  says :  Qui 
vos  audit,  me  audit.  "  He  that  heareth  you  heareth  me,  and  he 
that  despiseth  you  despiseth  me."  Thus  Christ  speaks  to  his 
disciples  and  those  who  in  place  of  the  twelve  apostles  (as  bishop 
and  pope)  govern  the  Christian  churches ;  as  then  the  Roman 

*[**  Show  us  that  in  the  Scriptures;  the  rest  is  human  nonsense."  (Bull- 
inger.)] 


84  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

Church  is  now  since  many  centuries  the  mother  of  all  others, 
which  is  confirmed  b/  words  of  Christ,  Matt.  xvi.  i8,  19,  as  this 
is  explained  in  Diss.  X.  and  XII.,  cap.  in  nova  et  cap.  quamvis. 
Concerning  this  there  is  here  talked  and  quarreled  against  the 
invocation  of  the  dear  saints,  just  as  if  such  honest  and  divine 
usage  followed  in  Christendom  many  centuries  were  not  founded 
upon  the  Scriptures,  although  St.  Jerome  in  "Ad  Jovianum " 
writes  much  concerning  the  intercession  of  the  saints,  and  that 
this  is  advantageous  to  us  he  proves  from  the  hopeful  Scriptures. 
That  we  also  receive  true  report  concerning  this  from  the  canon 
of  the  holy  mass,  introduced  by  the  old  popes  and  bishops,  and 
composed  by  Gregory  and  sung  in  all  Christendom,  proves  that 
the  intercession  and  invocation  of  the  dear  saints  and  the  Virgin 
Mary  is  not  considered  useless.  We  also  see  this  in  our  daily 
experience  of  miracles  which  occur  everywhere.  Consequently 
it  seems  wrong  to  me  to  consider  and  value  such  as  useless  and 
contrary  to  the  Scriptures,  etc. 

ZWINGLI. 

The  good  gentleman  also  intervenes  and  urges  much  in  favor 

of   the   ordinances   and   usage   of   the   Church,   the  fathers  and 

councils  gathered  together  and  inspired  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 

thmks  one  should  not  speak  against  them,  etc.     I  say  he  will  by 

no  means  prove  that  the  councils  have  all  been  gathered  in  the 

name  of  the  Holy  Ghost  for  the  purpose  of  all  the  ordinances 

which  they  made,  since  it  has  been  proved  before  that  they  often 

have   decreed   contrarily,   and   have    resolved    upon,   done    and 

rescinded   one   thing   to-day,  to-morrow   another,    although    the 

Holy  Ghost  is  at  all  times  alike,  and  does  not  oppose  his  decision 

once  rendered.     But  when  he  says  what  has  been  decreed  by 

councils  and  fathers  is  to  be  obeyed  like  the  Gospels,  I  say  what 

;!is  as  true  as  the   Gospels  and   in  accordance  with  the  divine 

'Spirit  one  is  bound  to  obey,  but  not  what  is  decreed  in  accord- 

lance  with  human  reason.     But  as  to  what  further  than  this  is  to 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  85 

be  considered  by  pope  or  council  as  a  mortal  sin  we  do  not  think 
that  we  are  in  duty  bound  to  treat  that  the  same  as  the  Gospels ; 
we  wish  to  be  free,  not  to  burden  our  consciences  with  that, 
E.  g.,  if  pope  or  council  commands  us,  at  risk  of  mortal  sin,  to 
fast,  or  to  eat  no  egg,  no  butter,  no  meat,  which  God  has  not 
ordered  us  to  do,  Luc.  x.  7  ;  Col.  ii.  16,  21,  but  is  permitted 
and  made  voluntary,  therefore  we  will  not  believe  that  such  and 
other  ordinances  decreed  by  the  councils  are  decreed  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  to  be  respected  equally  with  the  Gospel.  How 
does  it  happen  that  they  wish  to  order  us  to  eat  no  cheese,  no 
eggs,  no  milk,  but  stinking  oil,  with  which  they  scarcely  oil  their 
shoes  at  Rome,  and  otherwise  eat  chickens  and  capons?  But 
if  one  says  it  is  thus  written  in  the  canons  and  decreed  by  the 
fathers,  I  say  it  is  written  otherwise  in  Paul,  and  Christ  has  given 
another  and  easier  law.  Now  do  we  owe  more  obedience  to 
God  or  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  to  human  beings?  Acts  v.  32.  But 
when  he  declares  the  Church  has  decreed  such,  she  cannot  err, 
I  ask  what  is  meant  by  "Church?"  Does  one  mean  the  pope  i 
at  Rome,  with  his  tyrannical  power  and  the  pomp  of  cardinals 
and  bishops  greater  than  that  of  all  emperors  and  princes?  then 
I  say  that  this  Church  has  often  gone  wrong  and  erred,  as  every 
one  knows,  since  it  has  destroyed  the  land  and  its  inhabitants, 
burnt  cities  and  ravaged  the  Christian  people,  butchering  them 
for  the  sake  of  its  earthly  pomp,  without  doubt  not  on  account 
of  a  command  of  Christ  and  his  apostles.  But  there  is  another 
Church  which  the  popes  do  not  wish  to  recognize  ;  this  one  is 
no  other  than  all  right  Christians,  collected  in  the  name  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  by  the  will  of  God,  which  have  placed  a  firm 
belief  and  an  unhesitating  hope  in  God,  her  spouse.  That 
Church  does  not  reign  according  to  the  flesh  powerfully  upon 
earth,  nor  does  it  reign  arbitrarily,  but  depends  and  rests  only 
upon  the  word  and  will  of  God,  does  not  seek  temporal  honor 
and  to  bring  under  its  control  much  territory  and  many  people 
and  to  rule  other  Christians.     That  Church  cannot  err.     Cause  ; 


86  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

she  does  nothing  according  to  her  own  will  or  what  she  thinks 
fit,  but  seeks  only  what  the  spirit  of  God  demands,  calls  for  and 
decrees.  That  is  the  right  Church,  the  spotless  bride  of  Jesus  Christ 
governed  and  refreshed  by  the  Spirit  of  God.  But  the  Church 
which  is  praised  so  highly  by  the  Papists  errs  so  much  and 
severely  that  even  the  heathens,  Turks  and  Tartars  know  it  well. 
But  when  he  refers  here  to  the  words  of  Christ,  Luke  x.  i6, 
"  He  that  heareth  you  heareth  me,  and  he  that  despiseth  you 
despiseth  me,"  and  then  refers  this  to  pope,  bishop,  regents  of 
the  Roman  churches,  I  say  that  such  is  not  the  meaning  of  Jesus 
Christ,  that  we  should  obey  them  in  all  things  as  they  order. 
For  Christ  the  Lord  knew  well  that  such  great  braggarts  would 
sit  upon  the  chair  of  Moses  who  would  burden  the  necks  of  the 
poor  with  unbearable  and  heavy  loads,  which  they  themselves 
would  not  touch  with  a  finger.  Hence  the  saying,  "  He  that 
heareth  you  heareth  me,"  etc.,  will  not  serve  for  that  for  which, 
the  papists  and  sophists  interpret  it,  but  the  right  meaning  is,  as 
is  also  shown  by  what  precedes  and  follows.  When  Christ  sent 
his  disciples  to  preach  the  Gospel  in  country  and  city  he  spake : 
"  Go  ye  and  preach,"  saying  the  kingdom  of  God  is  approaching, 
etc..  And  later  Christ  said  :  "  He  that  receiveth  you  receiveth 
me,"  as  Matt.  x.  40  says.  This  means  they  should  preach  His 
word  and  bring  it  to  the  people,  but  not  human  foolishness  and 
law.  For  one  serves  the  Lord  in  vain  if  one  prefers  human 
doctrine  and  decree.  And  may  the  good  gentleman  furthermore 
remember  what  Jerome  writes  in  ad  Jovinian  concerning  the 
invocation  or  intercession  of  the  saints  that  he  has  not  read 
correctly.  For  it  is  written  ad  Vigilantium ;  but  how  Jerome 
twists  the  Gospel  in  regard  to  invocation  or  intercession  of  the 
saints,  as  he  does  often  in  other  places,  that  all  know  who  read 
Jerome  with  good  judgment.*      Finally,  in  regard  to  the  canon 

*  ["Zwingli  said  that  if  he  were  only  half  a  man,  stood  on  one  leg  and 
closed  one  eye,  he  would  nevertheless  yield  not  to  Jerome."  (P'aber.) 
"Thereupon  Heinrich  Wolf  said  'such  words  were  never  heard  from  his  lips. 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  87 

which  is  read  in  the  mass,  and  in  which  invocation  and  interces- 
sion of  the  saints  are  referred  to,  I  say  one  sees  readily  that  the 
canon  has  not  been  made  by  one  alone,  but  composed  by  several. 
For  there  are  many  useless  words  therein,  as  haec  dona,  haec 
munera,  etc.,  from  which  may  be  inferred  that  it  has  not  been 
made  by  one  scholar.  The  apostles  never  celebrated  mass  thus ; 
one  also  finds  that  in  several  instances  the  custom  of  the  canon 
is  different  from  ours,  which  I  shall  point  out  and  shortly  prove, 
if  God  wills  it.  Concerning  the  miracles  which  are  done  by  the 
saints  we  have  spoken  before.  Who  knows  through  whom  or 
why  God  decrees  this?  *  We  should  not  attribute  this  so  leadily 
on  account  of  our  unbeHef  to  the  saints  when  we  hesitate  con- 
cerning Christ  and  run  to  those  creatures  for  help.  This  all  is 
proof  of  a  weak  faith  and  small  hope  in  Jesus  Christ,  whom  we 
do  not  rightly  and  entirely  trust.     Why  do  we  flee  from  Him  and 

yea  never  thought  of  during  his  lifetime.'  To  be  sure,  when  you  referred  to 
Jerome  in  regard  to  the  intercession  of  the  saints,  he  said  the  argument  which 
Jerome  uses  there  has  no  basis  in  the  vScriptures."       ("  Gyrenrupfen.")] 

♦["You  have  omitted  that  Zwingli  even  spoke  against  the  public  Gos- 
pel :  '  when  one  says  that  the  saints  accomplished  miracles  then  the  devil 
has  done  it.'"  (Faber. )  "About  the  intercession  of  the  saints  he  prom- 
ises a  separate  book:  'the  whole  heavenly  host  will  be  with  me,  without 
suppressing  Christ,  but  rather  let  liim  be  mediator.'  Luchsinger  answers: 
He  (Faber)  thinks  because  Zwingli  said  something  about  the  wrong  craze 
for  miracles,  therefore  no  one  should  remember  that  any  more,  and  each  one 
think  perhaps  something  has  been  said  about  it;  it  doubtlessly  was  as  Hans 
Heyerli  (Faber)  said.  The  matter  is  this:  Hans  Heyerli  and  I).  Martin 
Blansch,  of  Tubingen,  wished  to  prove  the  intercession  of  the  saints  by  means 
of  the  miracles  (which  has  all  occurred  now  in  a  roundabout  manner,  for  as 
every  one  knows  they  have  attacked  no  article).  Yes,  the  saints  have  done 
miracles.  Zwingli  answered :  Miracles  are  not  a  sign  of  divinity,  as  Christ 
himself  declares,  Matt.  vii.  22,  but  where  real  miracles  do  occur  through  the 
saints  God  does  them  himself,  never  the  saints,  as  St.  Peter  speaks  in  the  Acts 
iii.  But  there  occur  many  miracles  by  the  aid  of  the  devil,  so  Matt.  xxiv.  24: 
He  also  accomplishes  miracles,  and  changes  himself  info  the  shape  of  an  angel  of 
light.    Thus  Zwingli  spoke,  and  that  fool  distorts  it  thus."     ("  Gyrenrupfen.")] 


8S  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

seek  aid  from  the  saints,  especially  as  we  do  not  recognize 
certainly  from  the  Scriptures  that  they  are  our  intercessors? 

After  this  Dr.  Sebastian,*  from  Schaffhausen,  a  member  of  the 
order  of  the  Barefoot  Monks,  arose  and  began  to  admonish  the 
assembled  council  that  they  should  manage  and  protect  the 
evangelical  doctrine  as  until  now,  since  there  was  no  one  there 
who  could  bring  forward,  upon  frequent  requests,  anything  more 
definite  from  the  Scriptures.  But  he  could  not  finish ;  the  vicar 
interrupted  and  said  : 

Dr.  Sebastian,  you  should  keep  still  and  not  speak  thus.  You 
know  well  what  you  promised  my  gracious  master;  it  does  not 
behoove  a  man  to  be  so  vacillating,  to  be  moved  like  a  reed  by 
the  wind ;  you  had  not  promised  that  before. 

Answered  the  aforesaid  Dr.  Sebastian :  Dear  gentlemen,  what 
I  have  promised  the  bishop  that  I  have  faithfully  and  honorably 
kept,  but  his  people  have  not  fulfilled  and  carried  out  what  they 
promised  to  me ;  that  you  may  testify  what  I  have  said  here  in 
public. 

After  this  speech  there  arose  anothei  doctor,  lector  and 
preacher  from  Bern,  of  the  order  of  the  Barefoot  Monks,!  and 
admonished  the  wise  council  of  Zurich,  speaking  as  follows  : 

Honorable,  careful,  wise,  gracious,  favorable  gentlemen  of 
Zurich,  3^our  intention  and  opinion,  published  in  all  places  by 
means  of  open  letter  for  the  aid  of  the  Gospel,  pleases  me  well, 
and  praised  be  God  that  you  are  the  people  to  further  and  not 
to  obstruct  the  word  of  God,  and  pray  God  that  He  will  not  turn 
away  and  cause  your  wisdom  to  desert  from  such  a  godly  under- 

*  Dr.  Sebastian  Hofineister. 

t  Sebastian  Meyer,  born  at  Neuenburg  on  the  Rhine,  in  Elsass,  twenty  miles 
north  of  Basel,  1465;  studied  at  Basel  and  in  Germany;  became  D.  D.;  en- 
tered the  Franciscan  order;  taught  in  monasteries  in  Strassburg  and  Bern;  was 
a  rather  violent  friend  of  the  Ref(nmation.  He  accepted  Lutheran  views  on 
the  Eucharist,  and  died  in  vStrasshurg,  1 545,  after  preaching  in  Bern  and  Augs- 
burg as  well  as  there. 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  89 

taking,  and  that  He  will  give  and  lend  you  power  and  might, 
strength  and  comfort,  that  you  will  be  frightened  by  no  temporal 
power,  whether  of  pope,  bishop  or  emperor,  but  so  act  in  these 
matters  that  it  will  redound  to  God  in  the  future  and  your  eternal 
praise.    And  do  not  mind  that  you  are  a  small  body  and  few.     I  \ 
^o  not  say  this  to  scorn  you,  but  I  mean  it  thus,  that  you  are  not    ; 
equal  to  a  whole  kingdom  and  are  considered  too  few  to  struggle 
against  so  many  nations.     Remember  that  God  has  always  by 
means  of  the  smallest  and  weakest  caused  His  divine  word  and 
will  to  appear  in  the  world,  keeping  the  same  hidden  from  the 
great  sages  of  this  world.     Therefore  fear  not    those    who  can 
injure  the  body ;  they  cannot  harm  the  soul.     Do  not  mind  that 
there  are  now  opposed  to  the  truth  of  the  Gospel  bishop,  pope 
and  sophists.     Thus  is  it  considered  by  God  to  make  the  wise  of 
this  world   ignorant,  and  cause  the  truth  to  be  made  clear  by 
the  simple.     Therefore  I  beg  your  wisdom  to  remain  steadfast  in 
the  word  of  God,  which  I  shall  also  faithfully  report  to  my  lords 
of  Bern,  whose  preacher  I  am,  not  in  the  cathedral,  but  a  lector 
of  the  order  of  Barefoot  Monks,  and  I  shall  sing  jour  honor  and. 
praise.     Then  he  sat  down  again. 

After  this  the  mayor  of  Zurich  again  exhorts  if  any  one  wisJies 
to  say  more  in  regard  to  these  matters  he  should  do  it.  My 
lords,  he  says,  are  tired  of  sitting.  It  will  also  soon  be  time  to 
dine. 

Then  arose  a  canon  of  Zurich,  by  name  Master  Jacob  Edli- 
bach,  and  spoke  thus  : 

Now  listen,  dear  sirs  :  My  good  friend  and  brother.  Master 
Ulrich,  has  before  exhorted,  in  the  name  of  Christian  love,  all 
those  who  have  anything  against  him  to  speak.  Now  I  have 
had  a  dispute  with  him  concerning  several  matters  and  sayings, 
but  the  same  was  finally  brought  by  both  of  us  before  the  chapter, 
where  it  was  settled,  so  that  I  thought  it  was  over  and  should  be 
referred  to  by  no  one  any  more.  But  now,  since  Master  Ulrich 
has  exhorted  those  who  have  spoken  against  him  so  frequently  to 
7 


90  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

Step  forth  in  the  name  of  God,  I  have  thought  he  may  mean  me 
also.  Hence  I  say  if  Master  Ulrich  desires  that  that  which  was 
treated  of  between  me  and  him  remain  in  the  knowledge  of  my 
lords  of  the  chapter  I  am  satisfied,  and  shall  refer  to  it  no  more. 
For  the  matter  is  bad  and  worthless ;  also  I  know  naught  con- 
cerning Master  Ulrich,  except  as  a  good  friend  and  brother  of 
the  chapter.  But  in  so  far  as  he  does  not  wish  this,  and  urges 
me  on,  then  I  shall  bring  it  before  you  gentlemen.  For  there 
are  some  behind  there  inciting  and  saying  in  scorn  one  dare  not 
speak. 

ZWINGLI. 

Dear  sirs :  I  had  earnestly  resolved  to  call  all  those  here  three 
times  by  name  who  have  accused  me  of  being  a  heretic  and  the 
like,  but  I  had  really  forgotten  it  now,  and  furthermore  I  would 
never  have  thought  of  the  good  gentleman,  Mastei  Jacob 
Edlibach.  It  is  simply  this,  I  did  treat  with  him  concerning,  a 
matter  before  the  prior  and  chapter,  which  I  did  not  think 
necessary  to  bring,  indeed  would  never  have  thought  of  bringing 
forward  here.  But  since  he  himself,  uncalled  for,  arises  and 
desires  to  refer  to  and  settle  the  matter  here,  I  am  well  satisfied. 

''  MASTER  JACOB. 

It  is  of  no  consequence.  I  came  to  Master  Ulrich's  house 
and  he  satisfied  me,  and  although  not  entirely,  still  I  am  satisfied. 
I  know  nothing  concerning  him,  except  all  good.  I  consider 
him  a  good  gentleman  and  brother,  hence  if  he  wishes  to  leave 
matters  as  they  have  been  settled  before  the  prior  and  chapter,  I 
am  entirely  content. 

ZWINGLI. 

You  may  well  refer  to  it  here ;  I  am  well  satisfied,  and  I  had 
rather  have  it  before  these  gentlemen,  since  you  yourself 
reported  it. 

But  there  were  several  there,  perhaps  relatives  of  the  afore- 
said Master  Jacob,  who  said  and  thought  that    Master    Ulrich 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  9 1 

ought  to  act  more  politely,  since  one  had  scarcely  incited  Master 
Jacob  to  speak. 

To  this  Master  Ulrich  answered  that  he  had  never  thought  of 
the  said  Master  Jacob,  nor  would  it  have  occurred  to  him  that 
he  should  speak  concerning  this,  etc. 

Thus  there  arose  a  dispute  ;  some  of  the  councilors  wanted  the 
matter  to  be  settled  before  the  chapter,  since  it  had  been  com- 
menced there ;  the  others  thought  that  it  should  be  tried  in  the 
presence  of  the  scholars  and  gentlemen  ;  but  finally  the  matter 
was  no  more  thought  of  and  thus  quieted,  perhaps  left  to  the 
chapter  and  thus  remained  unreferred  to.  This  I  report 
(although  not  serving  much  to  the  purpose)  that  I  may  not  be 
accused  of  not  understanding  and  refuting  all  speeches  and  op- 
position which  occurred  at  that  time.* 

*["How  could  you  say  truthfully  that  you  have  reported  and  under- 
stood all  speeches  and  rebuttals,  when  I  show  to  you  that  you  have  wronged 
not  only  me,  but  others,  also  Zwingli.'  You  have  omitted  from  my  state- 
ments two  quotations,  with  their  additions,  Matt,  xxviii.  20:  'I  am  with 
you,'  etc.,  and  John  xiv.  16:  'I  will  pray  the  Father,  and  he  shall  give 
you  another  Comforter,'  etc.  Do  you  know  now  what  I  said  thereupon? 
Since  the  appeaUng  to  the  saints  has  gone  on,  also  the  mass  has  been  held  as 
a  sacrifice  throughout  the  whole  of  Christendom,  not  only  now  for  a  thousand, 
but  for  thirteen  and  fourteen  hundred  years,  and  if  it  were  not  true  or  right- 
eous, then  Christ  would  have  wickedly  forgotten  us  and  the  eternal  truth;  yes, 
he  would  have  badly  kept  his  word.  But  he  has  said :  Behold  this  is  a  mys- 
tery; nor  has  he  also  said:  Only  after  1000  or  1200  years  shall  I  first  come 
again  to  my  bride  the  churches.  He  said :  Every  day  unto  the  end  of  the 
world.  And  although  we  did  not  heed  these  words  of  Christ,  regardless  of  the 
fact  that  his  words  are  everlasting,  according  to  Isaiah,  and  he  alone  is  the 
truth,  and  furthermore  cannot  lie,  according  to  St.  Paul,  and  he  is  the  one 
whom  St.  John  calls  the  faithful  and  true,  and  sooner  will  heaven  and  earth 
perish  rather  than  his  words,  still  we  would  have  the  other  promise  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  who,  it  has  been  promised,  will  remain  with  us  unto  eternity. 
Hence  I  do  not  in  great  affairs  carelessly  leave  or  desert  from  the  Church,  but 
I  entrust  that  rather  to  Christ.  Now  what  I  report  has  been  kept  by  the 
Church  for  so  many  centuries,  hence  I  would  be  very  careful,  since  the  two 
things  in  regard  to  the  saints  and  the  mass  are  not  contrary  to  the  Gospel,  and 


92  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

Aftei  this  the  mayor  of  Zurich  permitted  every  one  who  did 
not  belong  to  the  council  to  go  to  his  lodging  and  dine,  until 
further  request,  for  it  was  now  approaching  noon.  But  the 
councilors  the  aforesaid  mayor  ordered  to  remain,  perhaps  to 
consult  further  concerning  this.*  Thus  they  arose,  and  many  of 
the  strangers  went  to  their  lodging.  This  much  was  done  in  the 
forenoon. 

After  all  had  eaten  they  were  told  to  appear  again  in  the  city 
hall  to  hear  the  decision  made  by  the  wise  council  of  Zurich.f 

After  all  had  gathered,  there  was  publicly  read  before  the 
council  as  is  written  hereafter : 

When  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  and  upon  the  request  of  the 
mayor,  council  and  great  council  of  the  city  of  Zurich,  and  for 
the  reasons  contained  in  the  letters  sent  to  you,  you  had 
obediently  appeared,  etc.,  and  when  again  a  year  having  passed 
since  the  honorable  embassy  of  our  gracious  Lord  of  Constance,  on 
account  of  such  matters  as  you  have  heard  to-day,  was  here, in 
the  city  of  Zurich  before  the  mayor,  small  and  great  councils, 
and  when  these  matters  having  been  discussed  in  various  fashions 

I  also  can  prove  it  with  the  Scriptures,  and  thus  I  feel  like  the  honest  old 
peasants:  when  one  wishes  to  abolish  their  old  traditions  and  praiseworthy 
usages,  which  are  not  contrary  to  God,  they  do  not  like  to  obey  and  allow  it. 
And  thus  I  feel  in  regard  to  the  said  sayings,  I  tmst  to  Christ  and  God  and  the 
Holy  Ghost  that  thus  far  they  have  not  deserted  us,  and  I  say  also  agree  with 
St.  Jerome,  that  in  regard  to  these  matters  I  shall  rightly  hold  to  the  faith 
which  I  have  received  from  the  maternal  breast.  Although  the  doctrine  of 
yourself  and  your  brethren  would  be  very  acceptable  to  me,  for  I  would  not  be 
allowed  to  pray,  fast  or  do  other  good  works,  but  if  I  did  them  I  should  com- 
mit a  sin,  therefore  I  would  probably  go  to  heaven.  But  since  perchance  I 
cannot  ask  much,  therefore  I  do  not  wish  to  lose  the  intercession  of  the  saints, 
and  especially  of  the  Virgin  Mary."      (Faber.)] 

*  ["  Bullinger  puts  here  the  word  of  the  mayor:  And  the  sword  with  which 
he  from  Fislisbach  was  murdered  does  not  wish  to  appear  to  fight."] 

t  [""Which  has  been  decided  upon  in  accordance  with  the  debate  held." 
(Bullinger.)] 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTA'nON.  93 

it  was  reported  that  our  gracious  Lord  of  Constance  was  about 
to  call  together  the  scholars  in  his  bishopric,  also  the  preachers 
of  the  neighboring  bishoprics  and  parishes,  to  advise,  help  and 
treat  with  them,  so  that  a  unanimous  decision  might  be  reached 
and  each  one  would  know  what  to  rely  on,  but  since  until  now 
by  our  gracious  Lord  of  Constance,  perhaps  from  good  reasons, 
not  much  has  been  done  in  this  matter,  and    since  more  and 
more  disputes  are  arising  among  ecclesiasts  and  laymen,  therefore 
once  more  the  mayor,  council  and  great  council  of  the  city  of 
Zurich,  in  the  name  of  God,  for  the  sake  of  peace  and  Christian 
unanimity,  have  fixed  this  day,  and  for  the  advantage    of   the 
praiseworthy  embassy  of  our  gracious  Lord  of    Constance   (for 
which  they  gave  their  gracious,  high  and  careful  thanks)  have 
also  for  this  purpose  by  means  of  open  letter,  as  stated  above, 
written,  called  and  sent  for  all    secular    clergy,    preachers   and 
spiritual  guides,  together  and  individually,  from  all  their  counties 
into  their  city,  in  order  that  in  the  examination  they  might  con- 
front with  each  other  those    mutually  accusing   each    other    of 
being  heretics.     But  since   Master  Ulrich    Zwingli,    canon    and 
preacher  of  the  Great  Minster  in  the  city  of  Zurich,  has  been 
formerly  much  talked  against  and  blamed  for  his  teachings,  yet 
no  one,  upon  his  declaring  and  explaining  his  Articles,  has  arisen 
against    him  or  attempted  to  overcome    him    by  means  of  the 
Scriptures,  and  when  he  has  several  times  also  called  upon  those 
who  have  accused  him  of  being  a  heretic  to  step  forward,  and 
no  one  showed  in  the  least  heresy  in  his  doctrines,  thereupon 
the  aforesaid  mayor,  council  and  great  council  of  this  city  of 
Zurich,  in  order  to  quell  disturbance    and    dispute,    upon    due 
deliberation  and  consultation  have  decided,  resolved,  and  it  is 
their  earnest  opinion,  that  Master  Ulrich  Zwingli  continue  and 
keep  on  as  before  to  proclaim  the  holy  Gospel  and  the  correct 
divine  Scriptures  with  the  spirit  of  God  in  accordance  with  his 
capabilities  so  long  and  so  frequently  until  something  better  is 
made    known  to    him.     Furthermore,    all   your   secular   clergy, 


94  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

spiritual  guides  and  preachers  in  your  cities  and  counties  and 
estates  shall  undertake  and  preach  nothing  except  what  they  can 
defend  by  the  Gospels  and  other  right  divine  Scriptures; 
furthermore,  they  shall  in  no  wise  in  the  future  slander,  call  each 
other  heretic  or  insult  in  such  manner.  Those  which  seem 
contrary  and  do  not  obey  will  be  restrained  in  such  manner  that 
they  must  see  and  discover  that  they  have  committed  wrong. 
Done  the  Thursday  after  Carolus,  in  the  city  of  Zurich,  on  the 
29th  day  of  January,  in  the  year  1523, 

Thereupon  Master  Ulrich  Zwingli  arose  and  spoke  thus  :  *  God 
be  praised  and  thanked  whose  divine  word  will  reign  in  heaven 
and  upon  earth.  And  you,  my  lords  of  Zurich,  the  eternal  God 
doubtlessly  will  also  in  other  affairs  lend  strength  and  might,  so 
that  you  may  in  future  advance  and  preach  the  truth  of  God, 
the  divine  Gospel,  in  your  country-.  Do  not  doubt  that  Almighty 
God  will  make  it  good  and  reward  you  in  other  matters.     Amen. 

Whether  this  decision  having  been  read  pleased  the  vicar  of 
Constance  or  not  I  really  don't  know,  for  he  spoke  thusif 
Dear  gentlemen,  much  has  been  spoken  to-day  against  the 
praiseworthy  old  traditions,  usage  and  ordinance  of  the  holy 
popes  and  fathers,  whose  ordinances  and  decrees  have  until  now 
been  held  in  all  Christendom  true,  just  and  sinless.  J     To  pro- 


*  ["Zwingli  spoke  with  great  joy  after  the  aforesaid  decision  had  been 
read."     (Bullinger.)] 

t  ["And  first  here  the  vicar  became  angry,  saying:  My  dear  gentlemen,  ^ 
read  to-day  Master  Ulrich's  Articles  for  the  first  time,  which  before  I  had  had 
no  time  to  glance  over."      (Bullinger.)] 

J  ["'Yon  know  that  it  is  true  that  before  I  or  all  priests  had  come  to 
Zurich  no  one  knew  your  word,  whereon  the  dispute  was  based,  and  I  tel^ 
you  that  I  would  have  thought  sooner  of  death  than  that  there  should 
he  a  debate  at  Zurich  concerning  the  intercession  of  the  sa'nts.  Hence 
you  probably  marked  well  that  I  said  I  thought  I  had  come  to  Ziirich,  but 
I  see  I  am  in   Picardy,  and    this  saying  I    explained   to   be   from    the  here- 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  95 

tect  and  maintain  this  I  have  offered  myself  to  the  high  councils. 
But  now  when  for  the  first  time  to-day  I  have  looked  and  glanced 
through  the  Articles  of  Master  Ulrich  (for  I  have  not  read  them 
before),  it  seems  to  me  truly  that  these  are  wholly  and  entirely 
at  variance  with  and  opposing  the  ritual  (/'.  e.,  opposed  to  the 
praiseworthy  splendor  and  glory  of  the  churches  done  and 
decreed  for  the  praise  and  honor  of  God),  to  the  loss  of  the 
divine  teaching  of  Christ.     This  I  shall  prove. 

ZWINGLI. 

Sir  Vicar,  do  it.     We  would  like  to  hear  that  very  much. 

VICAR. 

It  is  written,  Luke  ix.  50  :  Qui  non  est  adversum  vos,  etc. 
"  He  that  is  not  against  us  is  for  us."  Now  these  praiseworthy 
services  or  splendor  of  the  churches  (like  fasting,  confession, 
having  festival  days,  singing,  reading,  consecrating,*  reading  mass 
and  other  similar  things)  have  always  been  decreed  and  ordered 
by  the  holy  fathers,  not  against  God,  but  only  for  the  praise  and 

tic  Picard.t  Hence  although  I  was  not  prepared  nor  thought  about  the  matter, 
still  I  desired  to  argue  concerning  it,  and  show  wherewith  I  had  proved  the  im- 
prisoned priest  to  be  in  error  whom  you  wished  to  make  a  bishop,  so  that  you 
also  might  fall  into  the  Arian  heresy.'  (Faber.)  And  before  he  said  :  '  Master 
Ulrich  had  published  the  67  articles  only  a  day  before  this  session,  and  before 
any  one  at  Constance  or  any  other  city  knew  a  word  of  it,  and  Master  Ulrich  also 
admitted  it  may  perchance  have  been  issued  too  late.'  Werner  Steiner  remarks 
in  writing:  'These  (the  Articles)  were  handed  to  him  by  the  pastor  of  Frauen- 
feld  X  on  the  journey  hither,  about  2  or  3  days  ago.'  "] 

*  [From  the  saying  of  Luke  ix.  not  six  words  have  been  quoted.  ("  Gym- 
rupfen." )] 

+  Picard,  the  founder  of  an  heretical  sect  of  the  Manichean  order,  the  Picard- 
ists,  in  the  15th  century.  The  customary  charge  of  immorality  was  brought 
against  them.  It  spread  from  its  home  in  Picardy  to  France  and  Germany, 
finally  to  Bohemia,  where  it  was  ruthlessly  suppressed  by  the  great  Hussite 
leader,  Ziska,  in  1421. 

t Twenty-one  miles  northeast  of  Zurich. 


g6  ZWINGLI    SELECl'IONS. 

honor  of  God  Almighty,  and  it  seems  very  strange  and  unjust  to 
me  to  consider  and  refute  them  as  though  wrong. 

ZWINGLI. 

When  my  Sir  Vicar  speaks  and  quotes  from  the  Gospel,  "  He 
that  is  not  against  us  is  for  us,"  I  say  that  is  true.  "  Now  the 
customs  and  ordinances  of  the  Church  are  ordered  and  decreed 
by  men,  not  against  God,"  etc.  Sir  Vicar,  prove  that.  For 
Christ  always  despises  human  ordinance  and  decree,  as  we  have 
in  Matt.  xv.  1-9.  When  the  Jews  and  Pharisees  blamed  and 
attacked  the  Lord  because  his  disciples  did  not  obey  the  doc- 
trine and  ordinance  of  the  ancients  Christ  said  to  them  :  "  Why 
do  ye  also  transgress  the  commandment  of  God  by  your  tradi- 
tion?" etc.  And  the  Lord  spoke  further:  "Ye  hypocrites,  well 
did  Esaias  prophesy  of  you,  saying.  This  people  draweth  nigh 
unto  me  with  their  mouth  and  knoweth  me  with  their  lips,  but 
their  heart  is  far  from  me.  But  in  vain  do  they  worship  me, 
teaching  for  doctrines  the  commandments  of  men."  One  sees 
here  that  God  does  not  desire  our  decree  and  doctrine  when 
they  do  not  originate  with  Him,  despises  them,  and  says  we 
serve  Him  in  vain,  which  also  St.  Paul  shows  to  us  when  he 
writes  thus :  Dear  brethren,  let  no  man  beguile  you  by  human 
wisdom  and  deceit,  in  accordance  with  the  doctrine  or  decree 
of  men,  in  accordance  with  the  doctrines  of  this  world,  and  not 
those  of  Christ.  "  Let  no  man  therefore  judge  you  in  meat,  or 
in  drink,  or  in  respect  of  a  holiday,  or  of  a  new  moon,  or  of  the 
Sabbath  days.  Which  are  a  shadow  of  things  to  come,"  etc. 
Col.  ii.  16  ff.  God  wants  from  us  His  decree.  His  will  alone, 
not  our  opinion.  God  the  Lord  cares  more  for  obedience  to 
His  word  (although  they  use  the  word  "obedience"  for  human 
obedience)  than  for  all  our  sacrifices  and  self-created  church 
usages,  as  we  have  it  in  all  the  divine  writings  of  the  prophets, 
twelve  apostles  and  saints.  The  greatest  and  correct  honor  to 
show  to  God  is  to  obey  His  word,  to  live  according  to  His  will, 
not  according  to  our  ordinances  and  best  opinion. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTA'nON.  97 

VICAR. 

Christ  said,  according  to  John  xvi.  12  :  "  [  have  yet  many 
things  to  say  unto  you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them  now.  Howbeit 
when  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  is  come,  he  will  guide  you  into  all 
truth."  Much  has  been  inaugurated  by  the  holy  fathers  inspired 
by  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  especially  the  fasts  and  the  Saturday  by 
the  twelve  apostles,  which  also  is  not  described  in  the  Gospel,  in 
which  doubtlessly  the  Holy  Ghost  taught  and  instructed  them.* 

ZWINGLI. 

Sir  Vicar,  prove  from  the  Scriptures  that  the  twelve  apostles 
have  inaugurated  Saturday  and  fasts.  Christ  said  in  the  afore- 
said place  the  Spirit  of  God  will  teach  them  all  truth,  without 
doubt  not  human  weaknesses.  For  he  spoke  according  to  John 
xiv.  26;  "The  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Father  will  send  in  my 
name,  he  shall  teach  you  (the  twelve  apostles  are  meant)  all 
things,  and  bring  all  things  to  your  remembrance  (advise  and 
recall)  whatsoever  I  have  said  -unto  you."  As  if  he  said  un- 
doubtedly, not  what  you  think  fit,  but  what  the  Holy  Ghost 
teaches  you  in  my  name  in  accordance  with  the  truth,  not  with 
human  thoughts.  Now  then  the  holy  apostles  have  never  taught, 
inaugurated,  ordered  and  decreed  otherwise  than  as  Christ  had 
told  them  in  the  Gospel.  For  Christ  said  to  them,  ye  are  my 
friends  if  ye  do  that  which  I  have  decreed  and  commanded. 
This  the  dear  disciples  diligently  did,  and  did  not  teach  otherwise 
than  as  the  right  Master  had  sent  them  to  teach  and  instruct, 
which  is  proven  by  the  epistles  of  St.  Paul  and  St.  Peter.  Hence 
your  arguments  cannot  avail  anything.  For  that  I  can  say  truly 
that  I  could  name  more  than  sixty  in  this  room  from  among  my 

*  ["Also  the  saying  John  xvi.  12  I  did  not  refer  to,  for  I  knew  the  verse 
did  not  belong  here;  just  as  little  did  I  say  about  fasting  Saturdays."  (Faber.) 
Hereupon  Heinrich  Wolf  maintains  he  referred  to  the  quotation  from  John  xvi. : 
Christ  still  had  many  things  to  say  to  the  disciples,  but  they  could  not  bear  it 
now^,  and  Zwingli  answ^ered  him,  and  showed  how  he  had  distorted  the  word 
of  Christ.     ("  Gyrenrupfen.")] 


98  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

lords,  laymen  not  learned  in  the  Scriptures,  who  all  could  refute 
your  argument  as  presented  until  now,  and  by  means  of  the 
Gospel  overcome  and  refute. 

VICAR. 

Very  well,  Master  Ulrich,  do  you  admit  that,  that  one  should 
only  keep  what  is  writ  in  the  Gospel,  and  nothing  besides?  Do 
you  admit  that? 

ZWINGU. 

Sir  Vicar,  I  pity  you  that  you  present  such  sophistical,  hair- 
spHtting  or  useless  arguments.  Perhaps  I  could  also  indulge  in 
such  devices,  perchance  I  have  also  read  it  formerly  in  the 
sophists,  hence  I  do  not  wish  to  be  entrapped  by  such  subter- 
fuges and  tricks.  I  shall  answer  and  argue  with  the  pure  Scrip- 
tures, saying  there  it  is  written.  That  is  befitting  a  scholar,  to 
defend  his  cause  by  the  Scriptures. 

VICAR. 

You  have  read  in  St.  Paul  that  he  accepted  and  taught  tradi- 
tions which  formerly  were  not  written  in  the  Gospel.*      [Zwingli 

*[**That  I  said  and  say  still,  that  we  are  bound  to  hold  many  things 
that  are  not  openly  written,  but  which  the  Church  holds  and  we  believe, 
and  furthermore  have  been  reported  by  the  teachers  of  the  first  churches 
as  having  come  to  us  by  order  of  the  12  apostles;  thus  I  wished  to  prove 
that  the  forty  days'  fast,  also  the  Sunday  which  in  the  Apocalypse  St. 
John  calls  'diem  dominicam,'  was  decreed  by  the  12  disciples;  if  we  do  not 
wish  to  despise,  depose  or  suppress  them,  then  it  is  fitting  that  what  so  many 
centuries  by  Christendom  generally,  also  by  the  heretics,  has  been  held  we 
should  also  keep,  even  if  it  be  not  openly  printed  in  the  Scriptures."  Further- 
more he  remarks:  "  It  is  a  harmful  error  not  to  admit  anything  unless  it  be 
expressly  described  in  the  Scriptures.  The  Sadduceans  also  denied  the  resur- 
rection because  it  was  not  expressed  in  the  Scriptures.  I  praise  you  all  that 
you  preach  the  Gospel  and  St.  Paul,  for  that  is  the  right  rock.  But  what  we 
have  also  from  the  time  of  the  12  apostles  you  should  not  cast  so  carelessly 
aside.  If  your  speech  were  true  we  would  be  obliged  to  leave  the  *  symbolo 
apostolorum,'  the  'homoousio,'  yes  from  the  persons  in  the  Godhead,  from 
free  will;  we  no  more  could  believe  that  Anna  was  the  mother  of  Mary,"  etc. 
(Faber.)] 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  99 

interrupts :  That  we  wish  to  hear.]  For  when  he  inaugurated 
among  the  Corinthians  the  custom  of  the  sacrament  as  he  had 
received  it  from  the  Lord  he  said  among  other  things:  Cetera, 
cum  venero,  disponam.  i  Cor.  xi.  34.  "And  the  rest  will  I  set 
in  order  when  I  come."  There  St.  Paul  announces  that  he  will 
further  teach  them  to  honor  and  to  use  the  sacrament.  But 
that  such  was  true,  and  that  the  twelve  apostles  gave  instruc- 
tions, presenting  them  as  traditions  which  were  not  decreed  by 
the  Gospel,  I  shall  prove  from  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians. 
Master  Ulrich  interrupts,  asking:  Where  is  it  written?  The 
vicar  answers :  You  will  find  it  in  the  second  chapter.  Zwingli 
says :  We  will  look  at  it.  But  it  is  not  there ;  we  will  look  for 
it  in  the  last  epistle.  But  very  well,  continue.  The  vicar 
answers  :  Thus  says  St.  Paul :  Nos  autem  debemus  gratias  agere, 
etc.  2  Thess.  ii.  13-15.  "But  we  are  bound  to  give  thanks 
always  to  God  of  you,  brethren  beloved,  etc.,  because  God  hath 
chosen  you  to  salvation,  etc.,  through  belief  of  the  truth,  where- 
unto  he  called  you  by  our  gospel,  etc.  Therefore,  brethren, 
stand  fast  and  hold  the  traditions  (/.  <?.,  teachings)  which  ye 
have  been  taught,  whether  by  our  word  or  our  epistle."  [Here 
Master  Ulrich  said  :  He  is  misusing  the  Scriptures ;  I  shall  prove 
it.]  Saint  Paul  says  here  that  one  should  stand  fast  and  hold 
the  traditions,  whether  emanating  from  his  words  or  his  epistle. 
This  is  proof  that  he  taught  and  instructed  that  which  formerly 
had  not  been  written,  but  clearly  and  openly  invented. 

ZWINGLI. 

In  the  first  place,  when  he  says  St.  Paul  gave  traditions  to  the 
people  of  Corinth  which  before  had  not  been  decreed,  I  say  no, 
for  he  says  in  the  same  place  :  "  For  I  have  received  of  the  Lord 
that  which  also  I  delivered  unto  you."  But  when  he  says : 
"And  the  rest  will  I  set  in  order  when  I  come,"  it  does  not  mean 
what  the  vicar  says  ;  on  the  contrary  he  is  punishing  the  Corin- 
thians on  account  of  misuse  and  mistake  in  the  taking  and  use 


lOO  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

of  the  divine  sacrament.  For  of  the  wealthy,  who  assembled  in 
the  churches  for  the  sacrament,  some  overate  themselves  and 
became  satiated,  while  the  other  poor  people,  at  times  hungry, 
had  nothing  to  eat.  This  is  what  St.  Paul  complains  of  when 
he  writes  :  What !  have  ye  not  houses  to  eat  and  to  drink  in?  as 
if  he  were  saying  the  sacrament  is  not  for  the  necessity  of  the 
body,  but  as  a  food  for  the  souls.  Therefore  St.  Paul  concludes  : 
"And  the  rest  will  I  set  in  order  when  I  come."  Not  that  he 
wishes  to  teach  otherwise  than  as  Christ  has  ordered  him,  but 
in  order  to  stop  and  better  their  misuse  does  he  say  this,  which 
the  Word  shows  :  Tradidi  vobis,  etc. 

Secondly,  since  Sir  Vicar  pretends  that  human  ordinance  and 
teaching  are  to  be  held,  this  also  is  not  written  in  the  Gospel ; 
he  refers  to  St.  Paul  to  the  Thessalonians,  where  he  writes : 
"  Therefore,  brethren,  stand  fast  and  hold  the  traditions  which 
ye  have  been  taught,  whether  by  word  or  our  epistle."  I  say 
Paul  did  not  speak,  teach,  write  or  instruct  in  anything  except 
what  the  Lord  had  ordered  him.  For  he  testifies  everywhere, 
and  also  proves  it  to  be  true,  to  have  written  or  preached  naught 
except  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  which  God  had  promised  before  in 
the  Scriptures  of  His  Son  through  the  prophets.* 

VICAR. 

Master  Ulrich,  you  said  in  your  Articles  that  the  mass  is 
no  offering.  Now  I  shall  prove  that  for  1400  years  "missal" 
has  been  considered  a  sacrifice  and  called  an  offering.  For 
"  missa  "  is  a  Hebrew  word,  known  by  us  as  sacrifice,  and  also 
the  apostles  were  known  as  "  missam  sacrificium." 

Zwingli :  Sir  Vicar,  prove  that.  Vicar :  To-day  I  spoke  as  a 
Vicar;  now  I  speak  as  a  John.  Zwingli:  Yes  indeed;  had 
you  long  before  to-day  taken  off  your  vicar's  hat  it  would  have 
suited  you  well  at  times  to-day;  then  one  could  have   spoken 

♦["And  the  traditions  do  not  disagree  with  the  Scriptures,  so  that  when 
the  apostles  wrote  one  thing  another  was  opposed  to  it."     (BuUinger.)] 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPyTATION.  lOi 

with  you  as  with  a  John.*  I  say  that  you  should  prove  from 
the  Scriptures  that  the  mass  is  a  sacrifice,  for,  as  St.  Paul  says, 
Heb.  ix.  12,  25,  26,  Christ  not  more  than  once  was  sacrificed, 
not  by  other  blood,  but  "  by  his  own  blood  he  entered  once  into 
the  holy  place,"  etc.,  nor  yet  that  he  should  offer  himself  often, 
as  the  high  priests  in  the  Old  Testament  had  to  do  for  the  sin  of 
the  people,  for  then  must  Christ  often  have  suffered.  Likewise, 
St.  Paul  writes,  Heb.  x.  12,  14,  "But  this  man  after  he  had 
offered  one  sacrifice  forever  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God.'* 
Likewise,  "  For  by  one  offering  he  hath  perfected  forever  them 
that  are  sanctified."  Likewise,  By  so  much  does  this  sacrifice 
surpass  the  sacrifices  in  the  Old  Testament  fulfilled  by  the  high 
priest,  by  so  much  more  powerful  is  this  declared  to  be  that  it 
was  sufficient  once  for  the  sins  of  all  people.  Heb.  vii.  22-27, 
Who  is  so  unreasonable  as  not  to  note  that  Christ  must  never  be 
sacrificed  in  the  mass  as  a  sacrifice  for  us  when  he  hears  that  the 

♦  [Hans  Hab  remarks:  "  Faber  attacked  the  Articles  severely,  but  could 
not  prove  that  they  are  unchristian.  It  happened  thus,  when  after  din- 
ner the  decision  was  read:  Just  like  the  peasant  boys,  you  first  began  in 
earnest  after  the  matter  was  closed,  and  even  then  you  did  not  wish  to 
attack  any  Article,  to  make  it  unchristian  by  means  of  the  Scriptures,  as 
you  attacked  them,  but  you  raised  the  Articles  in  your  own  hand  and  said ; 
Now  I  do  not  wish  to  speak  as  a  vicar,  but  as  a  John,  and  1  say,  Master  Ulrich, 
that  your  Articles  are  not  like  unto  the  truth,  and  are  not  based  upon  the  Gos- 
pel and  the  writings  of  the  apostles."  Zwingli  answered:  "  Sir  Vicar,  if  you 
had  taken  off  your  hat  long  ago  one  could  have  treated  about  something.  But 
in  answer  to  your  speech  I  spoke  thus:  You  shall  prove  your  wicked  speech 
with  the  deed,  and  do  well  and  attack  only  one  Article,  so  that  we  may  not  let 
this  day  pass  by  uselessly,  for  so  well  are  these  Articles  founded  that  heaven 
and  earth  must  break  sooner  than  one  of  these  Articles.  Upon  this  you  an- 
swered, as  always  before,  this  was  not  the  place  to  debate,  but  you  wished  to 
debate  in  writing  and  have  judges.  Thereupon  Zwingli  answered  he  was 
indifferent  whether  one  noted  down  everything  that  was  spoken,  but  he  wanted 
no  judge  over  the  word  of  God,  for  the  word  of  God  should  judge  the  people, 
and  not  the  people  the  word  of  God.  About  that  you  teased  Zwingli,  whether 
he  would  not  take  those  of  Zurich  as  judges?  Zwingli  replied,  no — so  much 
at  this  time,  although  much  was  still  added  thereto."      ("  Gyrenrupfen.")] 


I02  ZWINGLI    SELECIIONS. 

Holy  Ghost  speaks  from  the  Scriptures,  For  not  more  than  once 
(semel)  by  one  offering  he  entered  into  the  holy  place ;  otherwise 
he  must  die  often  ?  Now  matters  have  come  to  such  a  state  that 
the  papists  have  made  out  of  the  mass  a  sacrifice  for  the  living 
and  dead,  contrary  to  the  joyful  Scriptures  of  God;  they  wish  to 
protect  this  also,  so  that  they  may  defend  their  name  of  scholar 
or  their  avarice.  We  also  know  well  that  "  missa "  does  not 
come  from  Hebrew  or  Greek ;  but  you  present  nothing  from  the 
Scriptures. 

VICAR. 

I  will  do  that  and  prove  it  before  the  universities,  where  learned 
judges  sit.  And  choose  a  place,  be  it  Paris,  Cologne  or  Freiburg, 
whichever  you  please ;  then  I  shall  overthrow  the  Articles  pre- 
sented by  you  and  prove  them  to  be  wrong. 

ZWINGLI. 

I  am  ready,  wherever  you  wish,  as  also  to-day  I  offered  to  give 
answer  at  Constance,  if  a  safe  conduct  (as  to  you  here)  is  prom- 
ised to  me  and  respected.  But  no  judge  I  want,  except  the 
Scriptures,  as  they  have  been  said  and  spoken  by  the  Spirit 
of  God ;  no  human  being,  whichsoever  it  be ;  and  before  you 
overthrow  one  Article  the  earth  must  be  overthrown,  for  they  are 
the  Word  of  God. 

VICAR. 

This  is  a  queer  affair.  When,  e.  g.,  two  are  quarreling  about 
an  acre  or  about  a  meadow,  they  are  sent  before  a  judge.  Him 
they  also  accept,  and  you  refuse  to  allow  these  matters  to  come 
before  a  judge.  How  would  this  be  if  I  should  propose  that  you 
take  my  lords  of  Zurich  as  judges?  Would  you  not  accept 
these  and  allow  them  to  judge? 

ZWINGIJ. 

In  worldly  affairs  and  in  quarrels  I  know  well  that  one  should 
go  before  the  judges  with  the  disputes,  and  I  also  would  choose 
and  have  as  judges  my  lords  of  Zurich,  since  they  possess  justice. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  IO3 

But  in  these  matters,  which  pertain  to  divine  wisdom  and  truth, 
I  will  accept  no  one  as  judge  and  witness  except  the  Scriptures, 
the  Spirit  of  God  speaking  from  the  Scriptures. 

VICAR. 

How  would  it  be  if  you  chose  a  judge  and  I  also  one,  both 
impartial,  be  it  here  or  somewhere  else,  would  you  not  be  satisfied 
what  these  two  recognized  and  pronounced  as  true  sentence? 

Hereupon  Sir  Fritz  von  Anwyl,  major-domo  of  the  bishop  of 
Constance,  spoke : 

Must  we  then  all  believe  as  those  two,  and  not  hold  otherwise? 

Hereupon  there  was  a  laugh,  so  that  the  vicar  became  silent 
and  answered  nothing.  But  when  it  had  again  become  quiet  the 
vicar  spoke  thus : 

Christ  in  the  Gospel  *  says.  Matt,  xxviii.  20,  He  will  remain 
with  us  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  In  another  place  [Matt.], 
xxvi.  II,  he  says  :  "  For  ye  have  the  poor  always  with  you  ;  but 
me  ye  have  not  always."  Now  if  "there  were  no  one  who  decided 
concerning  these  sayings,  who  could  know  how  one  should  grasp 
these  two  sayings  thus  opposed  to  each  other?  One  must  then 
have  a  judge. 

ZWINGLI. 

The  Spirit  of  God  decided  itself  from  the  Scriptures  that  the 
Lord  is  speaking  of  two  kinds  of  presences,  of  the  corporal  and 
the  spiritual.  The  Scripture  speaks  evidently  of  the  corporal 
presence  or  bodily  attendance  of  Christ,  and  declares  that  Christ 
died,  was  buried,  arose  on  the  third  day,  and  having  ascended  to 
the  heavens  sits  on  the  right  of  his  Father.  Hence  one  notices 
readily  from  the  Scriptures  how  one  shall  understand  that  when 
the  Lord  says  :  "  Me  ye  have  not  always."  In  the  same  fashion, 
when  He  says  He  will  remain  with  us  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world,  the  Scriptures  teach  that  Christ  is  the  word  of  God,  the 
wisdom,  the  will  of  his  heavenly  Father,  the  truth,  the  way,  the 

*  ["  I  shall  not  be  with  you  always,  and  then."  (Bullinger.)] 


I04  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

light,  the  life  of  all  believers.  Therefore  one  evidently  sees  that 
spiritually  he  remains  with  us  unto  the  end  of  the  world.  Hence 
one  needs  no  other  judge  besides  the  divine  Scriptures ;  the  only 
trouble  is  that  we  do  not  search  and  read  them  with  entire  earn- 
estness.* 

Thereupon  Dr.  Martin  of  Tiibingen  speaks,  saying : 
You  interpret  the  Scriptures  thus  according  to  your  judgment, 
another  interprets  them  another  way ;  hence  there  must  always 
be  people  who  decide  these  things  and  declare  the  correct  mean- 
ing of  the  Scriptures,  as  this  is  symbolized  by  the  wheels  of  Eze- 
kiel. 

ZWINGLI. 

I  do  not  understand  the  Scriptures  differently  than  it  is  inter- 
preted by  means  of  the  Spirit  of  God  ;  there  is  no  need  of  human 
judgment. t  We  know  that  the  ordinance  of  God  is  spiritual, 
Rom.  vii.  14,  and  is  not  to  be  explained  by  the  reasoning  of  man 
in  the  flesh.  For  the  corporal  man  in  the  flesh  does  not  under- 
stand the  things  which  are  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  i  Cor.  ii.  14. 
Therefore  I  do  not  wish  to  have  or  accept  a  man  as  judge  of  the 
Scriptures. 

VICAR. 

Arius  and  Sabelius  would  still  walk  on  earth  or  rule  if  the 
matters  had  not  been  brought  before  judges. 

ZWINGLI. 

I  shall  do  as  the  fathers,  who  also  conquered  by  means  of  the 

*  ["In  regard  to  the  quotation  from  Matt,  xxviii.  20,  Zwingli  gave  you 
(Faber)  the  following  answer:  It  is  true  that  Christ  has  promised  to  remain 
vnth  us  to  the  end  of  the  world.  That  he  also  keeps  his  promise  faithfully, 
ye  pious  brethren  in  Jesus  Christ,  you  should  have  no  doubt.  God  is  with  us 
probably  as  with  no  council.  For  we  keep  His  word,  and  seek  the  truth  from 
his  word  alone.  Those  who  do  that,  God  is  with  them."  (Luchsinger  in 
'•  Gyrenrupfen.")]. 

t["The  .Srriptiuftj^—tiiiride  [hffTnyfC^v'"'  'IL  *^^  presence  of  men."  (Bull- 
inger.)] 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  105 

Scriptures,  not  by  means  of  human  understanding.*  For  when 
they  were  disputing  with  Arius  they  did  not  accept  men,  but  the 
Scriptures,  as  judges,  as  one  finds.  When  Arius  said  it  is  also 
proven  by  the  Scriptures,  as  he  thought,  that  the  Son  of  God  is 
less  than  the  Father,  John  xiv.  28,  the  dear  fathers  sought  the 
Scriptures,  allowing  them  to  judge,  and  showed  that  it  was  written, 
John  X.  30,  "  I  and  my  Father  are  one."  Also,  xiv.  9,  10,  "  He 
that  hath  seen  me  hath  seen  the  Father.  Behevest  thou  not 
that  I  am  in  the  Father  and  the  Father  in  me?"  Also,  "The 
Father  that  dwelleth  in  me,  he  doeth  the  works."  Such  declara- 
tions of  the  Scriptures  the  dear  fathers  considered,  and  showed 
that  Christ  had  two  natures,  human  and  divine,  and  proved  by 
the  Scriptuies,  not  by  the  judgment  of  men,  that  the  saying 
which  Arius  quoted.  The  Father  is  more  than  I,  referred  to  the 
humanity  of  Christ  and  the  later  sayings  spoke  of  the  Godhead, 
as  was  shown  by  the  Scriptures  themselves,  and  the  Scriptures 
interpreted  the  Scriptures,  not  the  fathers  the  Scriptures.  Thus 
St.  Augustine  overcame  the  Arians,  Manicheans,  etc. ;  Jerome  the 
J ovians,  Pelagians ;  Cyprian  his    opponents  and  heretics,  at  the 

*  [**  Did  you  not  also  hear  that  thereupon  Zwingli  answered  :  A  council  never 
overcame  a  heretic  except  with  the  Scriptures,  for  it  would  have  been  useless  if 
one  had  tried  to  overcome  Arius  in  another  fashion  except  by  the  Scripture. 
Hence  he  also  stood  there,  demanding  that  one  listen  to  the  Scriptures  in 
regard  to  all  the  Articles;  these  should  be  judges  over  him,  and  according  to 
that  he  would  allow  all  Christians  to  recognize  not  only  several,  but  all,  whether 
he  had  used  the  Scriptures  rightly  or  not;  and  he  asked  who  was  judge  between 
Hilary  and  Arians,  between  Jerome  and  Jovian,  between  Augustine  and  the 
Manicheans;  with  nothing  besides  the  Scriptures  they  proved  their  cause,  and 
thus  allowed  it  to  come  before  all  people  without  a  single  judge.  And  what 
you  attacked  afterwards,  just  as  if  he  had  boasted  of  great  abilities,  that  you 
invented.  For  Zwingli  spoke  of  the  rest  who  were  there  thus:  There  are  in 
the  hall  probably  men  as  learned  in  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin  as  at  Tubingen, 
Basel,  Freiburg  and  elsewhere."  (Hans  Hab  in  *' Gyrenrupfen.")  He  adds 
thereto:  "Zurich  has  probably  as  many  people  learned  in  the  three  languages 
as  he  and  his  papists  in  a  heap,  and  who  understand  the  Scriptures  better  than 
those  at  Lyon  and  Paris."] 
8 


Io6  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

same  time  with  books  referred  to  and  Scriptures  quoted,  so  that 
the  Scriptures,  and  not  they,  were  the  judges.  The  Scriptures 
are  so  much  the  same  everywhere,  the  Spirit  of  God  flows  so 
abundantly,  walks  in  them  so  joyfully,  that  every  diligent  reader, 
in  so  far  as  he  approaches  with  humble  heart,  A^ill  decide  by 
means  of  the  Scriptures,  taught  by  the  Spirit  of  God,  until  he 
attains  the  truth.  For  Christ  whenever  he  argued  with  the 
learned  Jews  and  Pharisees  referred  to  the  Scriptures,  saying : 
"Search  the  Scriptures."  John  v.  39.  Also,  "  What  is  written 
in  the  law."  Luke  x.  26,  etc.  Therefore  I  say  the  matter  needs 
no  human  judge.  But  that  at  various  times  such  matters  gener- 
ally have  been  brought  before  human  judges  and  universities  is 
the  reason  that  the  priests  no  longer  desired  to  study,  and  paid 
greater  attention  to  wantonness,  at  times  to  chess,  than  reading 
the  Bible.  Hence  it  came  about  that  one  considered  those 
scholars  and  chose  them  as  judges  who  had  attracted  unto  them- 
selves only  the  appearance  or  diploma  of  wisdom,  who  knew 
naught  concerning  the  right  Spirit  of  God  or  the  Scriptures.  But 
now  through  the  grace  of  God  the  divine  Gospel  and  Scriptures 
have  been  born  and  brought  to  light  by  means  of  print  (especi- 
ally at  Basel),  so  that  they  are  in  Latin  and  German,  wherefrom 
every  pious  Christian  who  can  read  or  knows  Latin  can  easily 
inform  himself  and  learn  the  will  of  God.  This  has  been  attained, 
God  be  praised,  that  now  a  priest  who  is  diligent  may  learn  and 
know  as  much  in  two  or  three  years  concerning  the  Scriptures  as 
formerly  many  in  ten  or  fifteen  years.  Therefore  I  wish  all  the 
priests  who  have  benefices  under  my  lords  of  Zurich  or  in  their 
counties,  and  have  them  exhorted  that  each  one  is  diligent 
and  labors  to  read  the  Scriptures,  and  especially  those  who  are 
preachers  and  caretakers  of  the  soul,  let  each  one  buy  a  New 
Testament  in  Latin,  or  in  German,  if  he  does  not  understand  the 
Latin  or  is  unable  to  interpret  it.  For  I  also  am  not  ashamed  to 
read  German  at  times,  on  account  of  easier  presentation.  Let 
one  begin   to  read  first  the  gospel  of  St.  Matthew,  especially  the 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  IO7 

v.,  vi.  and  vii.  chapters.  After  that  let  him  read  the  other  gospels, 
so  that  he  may  know  what  they  write  and  say.  After  that  he 
should  take  the  Acts.  After  this  the  epistles  of  Paul,  but  first  the 
one  to  the  Galatians.  Then  the  epistle  of  St.  Peter  and  other 
divine  texts;  thus  he  can  readily  form  within  himself  a  right 
Christian  hfe,  and  become  more  skillful  to  teach  this  better  to 
others  also.  After  that  let  him  work  in  the  Old  Testament,  in 
the  prophets  and  other  books  of  the  Bible,  which,  I  understand, 
are  soon  to  appear  in  print  in  Latin  and  German.  Let  one  buy 
such  books,  and  never  mind  the  sophistical  and  other  empty 
writings,  also  the  decree  and  work  of  the  papists,  tell  and  preach 
to  the  pe  )ple  the  holy  Gospel,  written  by  the  four  evangelists 
and  apostles,  then  the  people  will  become  more  willing  ard  skill- 
ful in  leading  a  peaceful  Christian  life.  For  matters  have  reached 
such  a  state  that  also  the  laymen  and  women  know  more  of  the 
Scriptures  than  sor'>e  priests  and  clergymen. 

Thereupon  spoke  a  priest,  decan  of  Glattfelden : 
Shall  one   then  not  ^ead  Gregory  or  Ambrose,  or  cite  their 
writings  in  the  pulpit,  but  only  the  Gospel? 

ZWINGLI. 

Yes,  you  may  read  them.  And  when  you  find  something 
written  therein  which  is  like  the  Gospel  or  quoted  from  the 
Gospel,  there  is  no  need  of  using  Gregory  or  Ambrose,  but  one 
first  of  all  honors  Christ  and  says,  this  the  Gospel  or  Scriptures 
tell  us.  And  this  is  not  only  my  opinion,  but  Gregory  or 
Ambrose  is  also  of  this  opinion.  For  the  dear  fathers  them- 
selves confirm  their  writings  with  the  Gospel  and  Scriptures,  and 
where  they  depeud  upon  their  own  thoughts  they  en  readily  an 
generally. 

Another  priest,  by  name  Hans  v.  Schlieren,  asks : 
But  what  shall  he  do  who  has  a  small  benefice  and  not  suflS 
cient  wherewith  he  could  buy  such  books,  the  Testament?     I 
have  a  poor  little  benefice ;  it  is  also  necessary  for  me  to  speak. 


I08  ZWINGU   SELECTIONS. 

ZWINGLI. 

There  is,  if  God  wills,  no  priest  so  poor  but  he  cannot  buy  a 
'Testament,  if  he  likes  to  learn.  Somewhere  he  will  find  a  pious 
citizen  and  other  people  who  will  buy  him  a  Bible,  or  otherwise 
advance  the  money  so  that  he  can  pay  for  one. 

After  this  the  vicar  began  to  speak  roughly,  saying : 
Very  well,  Master  Ulrich.  I  say  that  your  Articles,  as  these 
are  noted  down,  are  opposed  to  the  Gospel  and  St.  Paul,  also  not 
in  harmony  unto  the  truth.  That  I  offer  to  prove  in  writing  or 
orally,  wherever  you  please.  Choose  for  yourself  judges  for  these 
matters,  to  render  a  decision  therein,  in  whichever  place  suits 
you,  then  I  shall  prove  to  you  in  writing  or  orally  that  your 
Articles,  which  appeared  in  print,  are  untruthful  and  opposed  to 
the  Gospel. 

ZWlNGLI. 

Do  that,  when  and  wherever  you  please,  and  the  quicker  and 
sooner  the  more  agreeable  and  satisfactory  it  is  to  me.  Write 
against  my  Articles  or  opinions  whenever  you  wish,  or  argue 
against  them  wherever  you  please.  Why  don't  you  do  it  here, 
right  now?  Attack  one  of  my  opinions,  since  you  say  they  are 
opposed  to  the  Gospel  and  St.  Paul ;  try  to  prove  them  wrong 
and  false.  I  say.  Vicar,  if  you  can  do  that,  and  prove  one  of  my 
Articles  false  by  means  of  the  Gospel,  I  will  give  you  a  rabbit 
cheese.     Now  let's  hear  it.     I  shall  await  it. 

VICAR. 

A  rabbit  cheese,  what  is  that?*  I  need  no  cheese.  All  is 
also  not  written  in  the  Gospel  that  is  unrighteous  and  opposed 
to  Christ ;  f  where  do  you  find  in  the  Gospel  that  one  shall  not 
have  his  daughter  or  his  sister's  daughter  to  wife? 

♦  "A  rabb:  se  "  is  Swiss  for  a  remarkably  fine  cheese.     Glarus,  where. 

Zwingli  w?.'  or  ten  years  (1506-1 51 6),  was  then  and  is  still  noted  for 
its  cheeses, 

t['*VVhej  I  speak  an  unfit,  immodest  or  worthless  word,  i-^  Zwingli 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  IO9 

ZWINGLI. 

It  is  also  not  written  that  a  cardinal  shall  have  thirty  benefices. 

Master  Erasmus  v.  Stein,  canon  at  Zurich,  said  :  It  is  written 
in  Leviticus,  and  is  forbidden.  Answers  the  vicar,  saying : 
Erasmus,  you  will  not  find  it,  although  you  search  long  for  it. 
One  could  still  live  a  friendly,  peaceful  and  virtuous  life  even  if 
there  were  no  Gospel.* 

always  did  with  his  ridiculing  and  other  things,  which  for  the  sake  of  peace 
I  shall  not  repeat?"  (Faber.)  Conrad  Aescher  answers:  '*Zwingli  has 
treated  t'le  matter  with  such  earnestness  that  he  could  not  have  been 
more  in  earnest;  to  be  sure  he  had  to  laugh  with  the  rest  when  you 
came  with  your  old  tales,  which  we  tailors  and  shoemakers  had  aLso  learned 
long  ago.  But  you  act  like  all  bad  women,  blame  other  people  for  what  they 
do  themselves.  Nobody  began  his  speeches  with  more  ridiculing  than  you; 
why  you  smiled  so  friendly  that  we  were  afraid  that  the  stove  of  the  room 
would  become  so  attached  to  you  that  it  would  run  after  you.  Zwingli  has 
said  nothing  shamefulor  immodest,  but  you  have,  when  you  said,  where  is  it 
forbidden  in  the  Bible  that  a  father  may  not  many  his  daughter?  and  when  you 
said  one  could  live  righteously  even  without  the  Gospel,"  etc.  ("Gyrenrupfen.'*)] 
*  ["At  the  end  of  your  account  you  made  the  false  statement  that  I  said 
one  might  still  live  in  a  friendly,  peaceful  and  virtuous  way  even  if  there 
were  no  Gospel.  Do  you  think  I  am  mad,  and  speak  only  in  unchristian 
fashion  thus?  especially  as  before  that  I  made  such  a  speech  in  praise 
of  the  Gospel,  and  in  my  book  against  Martin  Luther  I  praised  so  highly 
and  emphasized  the  Gospel,  etc.  ?  And  you  dare  to  accuse  me  of  these 
words  which  in  my  life  I  never  thought  of?  Where  were  you  sitting  that 
you  could  hear  what  I  said?  WTiile  several  were  then  speaking  every  one  arose 
and  went  away,  and  no  one  sitting  could  have  heard  me.  Do  you  wish  to 
to  know  what  in  the  hum  of  voices,  as  the  people  were  getting  up  and  leaving, 
I  said?  Thus  I  spoke:  One  may  preach  the  Gospel  and  still  keep  the  peace. 
Zwingli  thought  it  could  not  be,  so  I  declared  it  could  be.  Thus  you  misquote 
me.  Did  not  the  Gospel  come  with  the  peace  and  the  peace  with  the  Gospel? 
But  you  say  only:  God  has  not  sent  peace  upon  earth."  (Faber.)  Han« 
Hager  answered  him:  "  Why,  how  can  you  deny  what  one  can  witness  and 
prove  with  so  many  true  men,  so  that  I  offer  to  prove  it  before  my  lords  of 
Zurich  at  whatever  hour  and  moment  you  will?  I  do  not  say  that  it  occurred 
at  the  end,  because  it  did  not  occur  at  the  end.  It  may  also  have  happened 
to  Erhard  [Hegenwald]  that  he  forgot  it  until  the  end.  What  does  that 
matter?  "  said  it,  ..;.  ..-.atter  when  you  said  it.  What  does  that  matter, 
Tis  long  as  you  had  to  lie?"     (Gyrenrupfen.)] 


no  ZWINGU    SEIJECnONS. 

ZWISGU, 

You  will  find  in  Leviticus  xviii.  that  relationship  of  marriage 
with  collateral  lines,  and  even  further  than  the  sisters,  is  forbidden. 
And  if  the  distant  and  further  removed  member  of  the  house  or 
blood  relationship  is  forbidden,  then  much  more  is  the  nearest 
forbidden  and  not  allowed,  as  you  may  read  in  Lev.  xviii.  17.  I 
pity  you  that  you  come  with  such  foolish  or  useless  and  thought- 
less remarks,  and  thus  cause  offense  among  the  people.  That  is 
to  give  real  scandal  and  vexation  to  your  neighbor.  You  could 
have  kept  that  silent  and  opposed  me  with  other  writings;  it 
would  have  been  more  worthy  of  you. 

Now  every  one  arose,  and  nothing  more  was  said  at  that  time; 
ever)'  one  went  to  where  he  had  something  to  attend  to.* 

It  v>'as  also  said  by  the  mayor  of  Zurich,  as  is  afterwards  written  : 
The  swoid,  with  which  the  pastor  of  Fislisbach,  captured  at 
Constance,  was  stabbed,  does  not  wish  to  appear.  The  afore- 
said mayor  remarks  that  the  vicar  had  not  yet  shown  any  Scrip- 
ture with  which  he  boasted  to  have  overcome  the  aforesaid  lord 
of  Fislisbach. 

There  also  spoke  the  worthy  Mr.  R.,  abbot  of  Cappel,t  saying : 
\\Tiere  are  they  now  who  wish  to  burn  us  at  the  siake  and  bring 
wood;  why  do  they  not  step  forward  now? 


That  is  the  sum  and  substance  of  all  actions  and  speeches  at 
the  assembly  of  Zurich,  etc.,  before  the  assembled  council, 
where  also  other  doctors  and  gentlemen  were  present  on  account 
of  the  praiseworthy  message   of    the  bishop  of  Constance  and 

♦£'*And  were  very  tired  of  the  irrelevant  quotations  and  speeches  of  the 
Vicar."     (Bullinger.)] 

tWolfgang  Roupli  (or  Joner),  son  of  the  mayor  of  Frauenfeld;  became 
abbot  1521 ;  accepted  the  Reformation  and  reformed  his  monastery.  He  called 
there  Bullinger,  who  was  Z-wingl's  successor,  as  teacher  of  the  cloister  school, 
1522. 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH   DISPUTATION.  Ill 

Master  Ulrich  Zwingli,  canon  and  preacher  at  the  great  cathedral 
of  Zurich,  which  (assembly)   occurred  at  the  time  and  on  the 
'day,  as  stated  above,  in  the  year  1523,  on  the  29th  day  of  Janu-    ' 
aiy. 

THE   SIXIY-SEVEN   ARTICLES   OF   ZWINGU. 

The  articles  and  opinions  below,  I,  Ulrich  Zwingli,  confess  to 
have  preached  in  the  worthy  city  of  Zurich  as  based  upon  the 
Scriptures  which  are  called  inspired  by  God,  and  I  offer  to 
protect  and  conquer  with  the  said  articles,  and  where  I  have  not 
now  correctly  understood  said  Scriptures  I  shall  allow  myself  to 
be  taught  better,  but  only  from  said  Scriptures. 

I.  All  who  say  that  the  Gospel  is  invalid  without  the  confirma- 
tion of  the  Church  err  and  slander  God.^ 

II.  The  sum  and  substance  of  the  Gospel  is  that  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  the  true  Son  of  God,  has  made  known  to  us  the 
will  of  his  heavenlv  Father,  and  has  with  his  innocence  released 
us  from  death  and  reconciled  God. 

III.  Hence  Christ  is  the  only  way  to  salvation  for  all  who  ever 
were,  are  and  shall  be. 

IV.  Who  seeks  or  points  out  another  door  errs,  yea,  he  is  a 
murderer  of  souls  and  a  thief. 

V.  Hence  all  who  consider  other  teachings  equal  to  or  higher 
than  the  Gospel  err,  and  do  not  know  what  the  Gospel  is. 

VI.  For  Jesus  Christ  is  the  guide  and  leader,  promised  by  God 
to  all  human  beings,  which  promise  was  fulfilled. 

VII.  That  he  is  an  eternal  salvation  and  head  of  all  believers, 
who  are  his  body,  but  which  is  dead  and  can  do  nothing  without 
him. 

VIII.  From  this  follows  first  that  all  who  dwell  in  the  head 
are  members  and  children  of  God,  and  that  is  the  church  or 
communion  of  the  saints,  the  bride  of  Christ,  Ecclesia  catholica.     i 

IX.  Furthermore,  that  as.,  the  members  of  the  body  can  do  j 
nothing  without  the  control  of  the  head,  so  no  one  in  the  body  j 
of  Christ  can  do  the  least  without  his  head,  Christ.  \ 


112  ZW'INGLI    SELECnONS. 

X.  As  that  man  is  mad  whose  limbs  (try  to)  do  something 
without  his  head,  tearing,  wounding,  injuring  himself ;  thus  when 
the  members  of  Christ  undertake  something  without  their  head, 
Christ,  they  are  mad,  and  injure  and  burden  themselves  with  un- 
wise ordinances. 

XI.  Hence  we  see  in  the  clerical  (so-called)  ordinances,  con- 
cerning their  splendor,  riches,  classes,  titles,  laws,  a  cause  of  all 
foolishness,  for  they  do  not  also  agree  with  the  head. 

XII.  Thus  they  still  rage,  not  on  account  of  the  head  (for  that 
one  is  eager  to  bring  forth  in  these  times  from  the  grace  of  God,) 
but  because  one  will  not  let  them  rage,  but  tries  to  compel  them 
to  listen  to  the  head. 

XIII.  Where  this  (the  head)  is  hearkened  to  one  learns  clearly 
and  plainly  the  will  of  God,  and  man  is  attracted  by  his  spirit  to 
him  and  changed  into  him. 

XIV.  Therefore  all  Christian  people  shall  use  their  best 
diligence  that  the  Gospel  of  Christ  be  preached  alike  everywhere. 

XV.  For  in  the  faith  rests  our  salvation,  and  in  unbelief  our 
damnation ;  for  all  truth  is  clear  in  him. 

XVI.  In  the  Gospel  one  learns  that  human  doctrines  and  de- 
crees do  not  aid  in  salvation. 

ABOUT  THE   POPE. 

XVII.  That  Christ  is  the  only  eternal  high  priest,  wherefrom  it 
follows  that  those  who  have  called  themselves  high  priests  have 
opposed  the  honor  and  power  of  Christ,  yea,  cast  it  out. 

ABOUT   THE    MASS. 

XVIII.  That  Christ,  having  sacrificed  himself  once,  is  to  eter- 
nity a  certain  and  valid  sacrifice  for  the  sins  of  all  faitliful,  where- 
from it  follows  that  the  mass  is  not  a  sacrifice,  but  is  a  remem- 
brance of  the  sacrifice  and  assurance  of  the  salvation  which  Christ 
has  given  us. 

XIX.  That  Christ  is  the  only  mediator  between  God  and  us. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  II3 

ABOUT   THE    INTERCESSION    OF   THE    SAINTS, 

XX.  That  God  desires  to  give  us  all  things  in  his  name, 
whence  it  follows  that  outside  of  this  life  we  need  no  mediator 
except  himself. 

XXI.  That  when  we  pray  for  each  other  on  earth,  we  do  so  in 
such  fashion  that  we  believe  that  all  things  are  given  to  us 
through  Christ  alone. 

ABOUT   GOOD   WORKS. 

XXII.  That  Christ  is  our  justice,  from  which  follows  that  our 
works  in  so  far  as  they  are  good,  so  far  they  are  of  Christ,  but  in 
so  far  as  they  are  ours,  they  are  neither  right  nor  good. 

CONCERNING  CLERICAL  PROPERTY. 

XXIII.  Tnat  Christ  scorns  the  property  and  pomp  of  this 
world,  whence  from  it  follows  that  those  who  attract  wealth  to 
themselves  in  his  name  slander  him  terribly  when  they  make  him 
a  pretext  for  their  avarice  and  wilfuUness. 

CONCERNING    THE    FORBIDDING    OF    FOOD. 

XXIV.  That  no  Christian  is  bound  to  do  those  things  which 
God  has  not  decreed,  therefore  one  may  eat  at  all  times  all  food, 
wherefrom  one  learns  that  the  decree  about  cheese  and  butter  is 
a  Roman  swindle. 

ABOUT    HOLIDAY    AND    PILGRIMAGE. 

XXV.  That  time  and  place  is  under  the  jurisdiction  of  Chris- 
tian people,  and  man  with  them,  wherefrom  is  learnt  that  those 
who  fix  time  and  place  deprive  the  Christians  of  their  liberty. 

ABOUT   HOODS,  DRESS,  INSIGNU. 

XXVI.  That  God  is  displeased  with  nothing  so  much  as  with 
hypocrisy ;  whence  is  learnt  that  all  is  gross  hypocrisy  and  profli- 
gacy which  is  mere  show  before  men.  Under  this  condemnation 
fall  hoods,  insignia,  plates,  etc. 


114  ZWINGU   SELECTIONS. 

ABOUT   ORDER   AND   SECTS. 

XXVII.  That  all  Christian  men  are  brethren  of  Christ  and 
'brethren  of  one  another,  and  shall  create  no  father  (for  them- 
selves) on  earth.  Under  this  condemnation  fall  orders,  sects, 
brotherhoods,  etc. 

ABOUT   THE   MARRIAGE   OF   ECCLESIASTS. 

XXVIII.  That  all  which  God  has  allowed  or  not  forbidden  is 
righteous,  hence  marriage  is  pennitted  to  all  human  beings. 

XXIX.  That  all  who  are  called  clericals  sin  when  they  do  not 
protect  themselves  by  marriage  after  they  have  become  conscious 
that  God  has  not  enabled  them  to  remain  chaste. 

ABOUT   THE    VOW    OF    CHASTITY. 

XXX.  That  those  who  promise  chastity  [outside  of  matrimony] 
take  foolishly  or  childishly  too  much  upon  themselves,  whence  is 
learnt  that  those  who  make  such  vows  do  wrong  to  the  pious 
being. 

ABOUT   THE    BAN. 

XXXI.  That  no  special  person  can  impose  the  ban  upon  any 
one,  but  the  Church,  that  is  the  congregation  of  those  among 
whom  the  one  to  be  banned  dwells,  together  with  their  watch- 
man, ;.  <r.,  the  pastor. 

XXXII.  That  one  may  ban  only  him  who  gives  public  offence. 

ABOirr  ILLEGAL   PROPERTY. 

XXXIII.  That  property  unrighteously  acquired  shall  not  be 
given  to  temples,  monasteries,  cathedrals,  clergy  or  nuns,  but  to 
the  needy,  if  it  cannot  be  returned  to  the  legal  owner. 

ABOUT   MAGISTRY. 

XXXIV.  The  spiritual  (so-called)  power  has  no  justification  for 
its  pomp  in  the  teaching  of  Christ. 

XXXV.  But  the  lay  has  power  and  confirmation  from  the 
deed  and  doctrine  of  Christ. 


THE    FIRST    ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  II5 

XXXVI.  All  that  the  spiritual  so-called  state  claims  to  have  of 
power  and  protection  belongs  to  the  lay,  if  they  wish  to  be 
Christians. 

XXXVII.  To  them,  furthermore,  all  Christians  owe  obedience 
without  exception.  ' 

XXXVIII.  In  so  far  as  they  do  not  command  that  which  is 
contrary  to  God. 

XXXIX.  Therefore  all  their  laws  shall  be  in  harmony  with  the 
divine  will,  so  that  they  protect  the  oppressed,  even  if  he  does 
not  complain. 

XL.  They  alone  may  put  to  death  justly,  also,  only  those  who 
give  public  offence  (if  God  is  not  offended  let  another  thing  be 
commanded). 

XLI.  If  they  give  good  advice  and  help  to  those  for  whom  they 
must  account  to  God,  then  these  owe  to  them  bodily  assistance. 

XLII.  But  if  they  are  unfaithful  and  transgress  the  laws  of 
Christ  they  may  be  deposed  in  the  name  of  God. 

XLIII.  In  short,  the  realm  of  him  is  best  and  most  stable  who 
rules  in  the  name  of  God  alone,  and  his  is  worst  and  most  un- 
stable who  rules  in  accordance  with  his  own  will. 

ABOUT  PRAYER. 

XLIV.  Real  petitioners  call  to  God  in  spirit  and  truly,  without 
great  ado  before  men. 

XLV.  Hypocrites  do  their  work  so  that  they  may  be  seen  by 
men,  also  receive  their  reward  in  this  life. 

XLVI.  Hence  it  must  always  follow  that  church-song  and  out- 
cry without  devoutness,  and  only  for  reward,  is  seeking  either 
fame  before  the  men  or  gain. 

ABOUT   OFFENCE. 

XLVII.  Bodily  death  a  man  should  suffer  before  he  offend  or 
scandalize  a  Christian. 

XLVIII.  Who  through  stupidness  or  ignorance  is  offended  with- 


\ 


Il6  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

out  cause,  he  should  not  be  left  sick  or  weak,  but  he  should  be 
made  strong,  that  he  may  not  consider  as  a  sin  which  is  not  a  sin. 
XLIX.  Greater  offence  I  know  not  than  that  one  does  not 
allow  priests  to  have  wives,  but  permits  them  to  hire  prostitutes. 
Out  upon  the  shame  ! 

ABOUT    REMITTANCE   OF   SIN. 

L.  God  alone  remits  sin  through  Jesus  Christ,  his  Son,  and 
alone  our  Lord. 

LI.  Who  assigns  this  to  creatures  detracts  from  the  honor  of 
God  and  gives  it  to  him  who  is  not  God ;  this  is  real  idolatry. 

LII.  Hence  the  confession  which  is  made  to  the  priest  or 
neighbor  shall  not  be  declared  to  be  a  remittance  of  sin,  but  only 
a  seeking  for  ad\'ice. 

LIII.  Works  of  penance  coming  from  the  counsel  of  human 
beings  (except  the  ban)  do  not  cancel  sin;  they  are  imposed  as 
a  menace  to  others. 

LIV.  Christ  has  borne  all  our  pains  and  labor.  Hence  who- 
ever assigns  to  works  of  penance  what  belongs  to  Christ  errs  and 
slanders  God. 

LV.  Whoever  pretends  to  remit  to  a  penitent  being  any  sin 
would  not  be  a  vicar  of  God  or  St.  Peter,  but  of  the  devil. 

LVI.  Whoever  remits  any  sin  only  for  the  sake  of  money  is  the 
companion  of  Simon  and  Balaam,  and  the  real  messenger  of  the 
devil  personified. 

ABOUT  PURGATORY. 

LVH.  The  true  divine  Scriptures  know  naught  about  purgatory 

after  this  life. 

LVin.  The  sentence  of  the  dead  is  known  to  God  only, 
LIX.  And  the  less  God  has  let  us  know  concerning  it,  the  less 

we  should  undertake  to  know  about  it 
'^    LX.  That  man  earnestly  calls  to  God  to  show  mercy  to  the 

dead  I  do  not  condemn,  but  to  determine  a  period  of  time  there- 


THE    FIRST   ZURICH    DISPUTATION.  II7 

for  (seven  years  for  a  mortal  sin),  and  to  lie  for  the  sake  of  gain, 
is  not  human,  but  devilish. 

ABOUT  THE   PRIESTHOOD. 

LXI.  About  the  consecration  which  the  priests  have  received 
in  late  times  the  Scriptures  know  nothing. 

LXII.  Furthermore,  they  know  no  priests  except  those  who 
proclaim  the  word  of  God. 

LXIII.  They  command  honor  should  be  shown,  /.  <?.,  to  furnish 
them  with  food  for  the  body. 

ABOUT   THE    CESSATION   OF   MISUSAGES. 

LXIV.  All  those  who  recognize  their  errors  shall  not  be  allowed 
to  suffer,  but  to  die  in  peace,  and  thereafter  arrange  in  a  Chris- 
tian manner  their  bequests  to  the  Church. 

LXV.  Those  who  do  not  wish  to  confess,  God  will  probably 
take  care  of.  Hence  no  force  shall  be  used  against  their  body, 
unless  it  be  that  they  behave  so  criminally  that  one  cannot  do 
without  that. 

LXVI.  All  the  clerical  superiors  shall  at  once  settle  down,  and 
with  unanimity  set  up  the  cross  of  Christ,  not  the  money-chests,  or 
they  will  perish,  for  I  tell  thee  the  ax  is  raised  against  the  tree. 

LXA^II.  If  any  one  wishes  conversation  with  me  concerning 
interest,  tithes,  unbaptized  children  or  confirmation,  I  am  willing 
to  answer. 

Let  no  one  undertake  here  to  argue  with  sophistry  or  human 
foolishness,  but  come  to  the  Scriptures  to  accept  them  as  the  judge 
(foras  cares  !  the  Scriptures  breathe  the  Spirit  of  God),  so  that 
the  truth  either  may  be  found,  or  if  found,  as  I  hope,  retained. 
Amen. 

Thus  may  God  rule. 

The  basis  and  commentary  of  these  articles  will  soon  appear 
in  print. 


Il8  ZWINGU   SELECTIONS. 

IV.  ORDINANCE  AND  NOTICE.  HOW  MA^ITERS  CON- 
CERNING MARRIAGE  SHALL  BE  CONDUCTED  IN 
THE  CITY  OF  ZURICH.* 

We,  the  Burgomaster,  Council  and  the  Great  Council,  which 
they  call  the  Two  Hundred,  of  the  city  of  Zurich,  offer  to  each 
and  all  people's  priests,  pastors,  those  who  have  the  care  of 
souls,  and  preachers,  also  to  all  over-governors,  under-governors, 
officials  and  any  others  who  have  livings,  homes  or  seats  in  our 
cities,  counties,  principalities,  high  and  low  courts  and  territories, 
our  greeting,  favorable  and  affectionate  good  wishes.  I  call  yout 
attention  to  what  each  one  of  you  has  noticed  and  seen  up  to  the 
present  time,  that  many  kinds  of  complaints  and  errors  have 
arisen  in  matrimonial  affairs.  Since  the.  parties  have  been  sum- 
moned before  the  court  at  Constance  or  other  foreign  courts 
again  and  again,  and  have  been  judged  at  considerable  cost; 
since  they,  at  that  place,  and  in  cases  where  the  people  were 
well  off  in  temporal  goods,  have  been  detained  without  judgment, 
and,  as  far  as  we  know,  to  their  own  danger,  etc.,  and  in  order 
that  such  great  cost,  trouble  and  labor  among  you  men  and 
women  having  business  with  each  other  with  regard  to  matrimony, 
and  who  live  and  are  at  home  in  our  territories,  high  and  low 
courts,  may  be  put  aside,  done  away  with  and  avoided,  and  also 
in  order  that  each  may  be  properly  judged  with  promptness,  thus 
we  have  ordained  the  following  common  ordinances  concerning 
marriage,  and  have  given  notice  of  them,  and  have  undertaken  to 
practice  them  for  a  time,  with  the  understanding  that  they  are  to 
be  decreased,  or  increased,  or  entirely  done  away  wth.  And  if 
any  parties  come  from  our  true  and  beloved  confederates,  from 
whatsoever  place,  who  desire  to  seek  and  make  use  of  law  with 
regard  to  matrimony  on  account  of  the  small  cost  among  us, 
bringing  each  from  his  local  authorities  letters  and  seals  testify- 

•  Printed  at  Zurich  by  John  Hager.  Zwingli's  Works,  II.,  2,  356-359. 
Translated  from  the  original  German  by  Prof.  Lawrence  A.  McLoutb.  BuUinger 
expressly  remarks  that  Zwingli  was  the  author  of  the  order  of  the  canonical  court. 


MATTERS    CONCERNING    MARRIAGE.  II9 

ing  that  such  right  may  be  extended  to  them,  then  they  shall  be 
accepted  for  the  sake  of  especial  friendship,  and  they  shall  be 
treated  with  regard  to  this  law  in  every  way  as  our  own,  but  we 
shall  not  otherwise  burden  ourselves  with  any  one  dwelling  out- 
side of  the  territories  of  the  city  of  Zurich. 

And  in  order  that  such  legal  business  may  be  attended  to 
promptly,  as  necessity  demands,  we  have  chosen  as  judges  six 
men,  two  from  the  people's  priests  in  our  city,  who  are  taught 
in  the  Word  of  God,  also  two  from  the  small,  and  two  from  the 
large  council.  Among  these,  each  one  shall  serve  two  months  as 
magistrate  or  judge,  shall  summon,  order,  collect,  examine, 
practice  and  execute  such  court  business  as  necessity  demands. 

Whatever  they  pronounce  and  judge,  according  to  the  contents 
of  the  following  articles  and  ordinances,  shall  stand.  If,  how- 
ever, any  of  our  people,  or  others,  wish  to  appeal,  it  shall  be  made 
to  no  other  body  than  the  Honorable  Council  in  our  city  of 
Zurich. 

The  court  days  are,  and  shall  be,  on  Monday  and  Thursday. 
The  seat  or  place  of  the  court  the  judge  shall  choose  and 
announce.  Accordingly,  when  it  has  struck  one  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon,  then  the  judges,  secretary,  the  court  beadle,  and  who- 
ever serves  the  court,  shall  be  there,  on  pain  of  breaking  their 
oath,  and  shall  assist  in  the  action,  as  is  proper.  But  if  any  one 
cannot  be  there  on  account  of  business  of  the  city,  or  other  law- 
ful cause,  then  the  burgomaster  shall,  by  means  of  the  beadle, 
appoint  another,  and  let  him  sit.  And  whoever  is  judge  at  a 
time  shall  have  possession  of  the  seal  of  the  court,  and  shall, 
through  the  beadle,  announce  orally  or  by  other  notice  the 
sessions  and  orders,  always  in  good  time.  The  cases  which 
come  before  him,  and  which  need  consideration  or  deliberation, 
he  shall  not  postpone  or  hold  up  more  than  a  week,  so  that  the 
people  may  be  joined  or  separated  promptly. 

And  here  follow  the  articles  and  ordinances  concerning 
marriage. 


I  20  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

First,  a  general  ordinance :  That  no  one  shall  enter  into 
matrimony  in  our  city  and  country  without  the  testimony  and 
presence  of  at  leat  two  pious,  honorable  citizens  in  good  standing. 

EXPL,\NA'IION    OF    THIS  ORDINANCE. 

No  one  shall  marry,  engage  or  give  to  another  his  son  or 
daughter  without  the  favor,  knowledge  and  will  of  the  father, 
motlier,  guardians  or  others,  who  are  responsible  for  the  young 
people.  Whoever  transgresses  this  shall  be  punished  according 
to  the  manner  of  the  case,  and  the  marriage  shall  be  invalid. 

Now  in  order  that  marriage  requirements  may  not  be  made 
lower  than  before,  no  marriage  shall  hold  which  a  minor  shall 
enter  into  without  the  knowledge  of  the  above-mentioned,  his 
father,  mother,  guardian,  or  other  people  responsible,  as  have 
been  named,  before  the  minor  is  fully  nineteen  years  old.  But 
if  it  happens  before  this,  then  the  ones  mentioned,  the  father, 
etc.,  can  hinder  it  and  nullify  it.  But  in  case  these  are  careless, 
and  have  not  provided  for  their  children  in  the  nineteen  years, 
then  the  children  may  marry  and  care  for  themselves,  with  God's 
help,  unhindered  by  any  one  and  without  any  payment.  Neither 
father,  mother,  legal  representative  or  any  one  shall  force  or 
compel  their  children  to  a  marriage  against  their  will  at  any  time. 
But  where  that  has  happened,  and  is  legally  reported,  it  shall 
not  be  valid  and  the  trespasser  shall  be  punished. 

Marriages  that  have  been  arranged  for  or  already  consummated 
shall  not  be  hindered  or  disturbed,  as  is  right  and  proper,  in  any 
degree,  by  anything,  cause  or  reason,  except  the  clearly  expressed 
causes  as  are  in  the  holy  Scriptures,  Leviticus  xviii. 

And  what  has  heretofore  been  achieved  by  dispensations  and 
money  shall  be  done  away  with  entirely,  and  cause  no  more 
trouble. 

ExcErnoNs   10  THE  i,aw. 

When  two  take  each  other  who  are  free,  and  who  had  no  one 
to  whom   they  were  under  obligation  or  who  took  an  interest  in 


MATTERS    CONCERNING    MARRIAGE.  121 

them,  or  two  are  engaged  to  each  other,  they  shall  stand  by  each 
other.  But  the  girl  shall  be  over  fourteen  and  the  boy  over  six- 
teen. 

But  where  they  are  engaged,  and  have  no  references,  accord- 
ing to  the  above  ordinance,  a  marriage  shall  not  be  valid. 
Accordingly,  let  each  one  take  care  and  avoid  such  disgrace  and 
injury. 

But  if  one  seduces,  disgraces  or  ruins  a  daughter,  maid  or 
young  woman,  who  was  not  yet  married,  he  shall  give  her  a  morn- 
ing gift,  and  shall  marry  her.  But  if  her  father  and  mother,  or 
the  guardian,  or  other  person  responsible,  refuse  her  to  him,  then 
the  perpetrator  shall  give  a  dowry  to  the  girl,  according  to  the 
judgment  of  the  authorities. 

And  if  any  one  boasts  to  the  danger  and  injury  of  another 
[matrimonially],  and  is  convicted  of  such  a  thing,  he  shall  be 
severely  punished. 

Likewise,  in  order  to  avoid  suspicion,  calumny  and  deceit,  we 
desire  that  each  marriage  that  is  properly  performed  shall  be 
publicly  witnessed  in  a  church,  and  provided  with  a  license  of  the 
parish.  Each  preacher  shall  enroll  and  keep  record  of  all  such 
persons,  and  no  one  shall  give  those  under  him  to  another  without, 
his  favor  and  will,  publicly  expressed. 

WHAT    CAN    NULLIFY    AND    BREAK    UP    A    MARRIAGE, 

It  is  proper  for  a  pious  married  person,  who  has  given  no  cause 
for  such  act,  to  put  away  from  himself  or  herself  the  other  who 
is  caught  in  open  adultery,  indeed  to  leave  him  or  her,  and  to 
provide  himself  or  herself  with  another  spouse. 

This  we  call  and  consider  open  adultery,  which  is  discovered 
and  proved,  with  sufficient  public  notice,  before  the  matrimonial 
court,  as  is  proper,  or  is  so  plain  and  suspicious  in  fact  that  the 
deed  cannot  be  denied  with  any  kind  of  truth. 

But  in  order  that  adultery  may  not  be  condoned,  and  that  no 
one  may  seek  a  cause  to  secure  a  new  marriage  by  means  of 
9 


122  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

adulter}',  it  will  be  necessary  that  a  severe  punishment  be  placed 
upon  adultery,  for  it  was  forbidden  in  the  Old  Testament  on  pain 
of  stoning  to  death. 

The  preachers  to  whom  the  Word  of  God  and  superintendence 
(of  morals)  are  commended  shall  ban  and  exclude  such  sinners 
from  the  Christian  parish,  but  the  corporal  punishment  and  the 
matter  of  the  property  shall  be  referred  to  the  civil  authorities. 

But  that  no  one  for  this  reason  may  fear  marriage,  and  resort 
to  prostitution,  these  sinners,  too,  as  is  now  announced,  shall  be 
excluded. 

Since,  now,  marriage  was  instituted  by  God  to  avoid  unchastity, 
and  since  it  often  occurs  that  some,  by  nature  or  other  shortcom- 
ings, are  not  fitted  for  the  partners  they  have  chosen,  they  shall 
nevertheless  live  together  as  friends  for  a  year,  to  see  if  matters 
may  not  better  themselves  by  the  prayers  of  themselves  and  of 
other  honest  people.  If  it  does  not  grow  better  in  that  time, 
they  shall  be  separated  and  allowed  to  marry  elsewhere. 

X.ikewise,  greater  reasons  than  adultery,  as  destroying  life, 
^endangering  life,  being  mad  or  crazy,  offending  by  whorishness, 
or  leaving  one's  spouse  without  permission,  remaining  abroad  a 
long  time,  having  leprosy,  or  other  such  reasons,  of  which  no  rule 
can  be  mdae  on  account  of  their  dissimilarity — these  cases  the 
judges  can  investigate,  and  proceed  as  God  and  the  character  of 
the  cases  shall  demand. 

The  ordinances  shall  be  carefully  and  repeatedly  announced  by 
all  clergymen,  and  their  parishes  warned  against  trespassing  them. 

Given  at  Zurich  on  Wednesday,  the  Eoth  of  May,  in  the  year 

1525- 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST    TRICKS.  1 23 

V.  REFUTATION   OF  THE  TRICKS  OF  THE  BAPTISTS 
BY  HULDREICH  ZWINGLL* 

HULDREICH  ZWINGLI  TO  ALL  THE  MINISTERS  OF  THE  GOSPEL  OF  CHRIST. 

Grace  and  peace  from  the  Lord.  It  is  an  old  saying,  dear 
brethren,  that  success  is  the  mother  of  evils,  and  this  is  pro- 
foundly true.  For  since  even  a  little  was  conceded  to  the  desires 
of  certain  ones  through  our  idleness  or  blindness,  these  are  now 

*  Zwingli's  Wo7'ks,  III.,  357-437.  Translated  from  the  Latin  by  Henry 
Preble  and  George  W.  Gilmore. 

On  Monday,  October  26,  1523,  the  Second  Disputation  was  held  in  Zurich, 
again  between  Zwingli  and  the  representatives  of  the  Old  Faith  and  other 
clergy,  and  in  that  Disputation  for  the  first  time  ^  the  Baptist  party  in  Zurich 
made  their  appearance.  The  subject  of  the  debate  was  what  position  the 
reform  party  should  take  in  regard  to  the  use  of  images  in  the  churches  and  in 
regard  to  the  sacraments.  The  Baptist  party  in  Zurich  were  the  radicals.  The 
origin  of  this  party  was  in  a  sort  of  inquiry  meeting — that  is,  some  members  of 
Zwingli's  congregation  used  to  meet  in  a  private  house  and  talk  over  the  ser- 
mons which  they  had  heard  from  Zvnngli,  frequently  in  his  presence.  Zwingli 
may  have  said  in  these  gatherings  a  good  many  things  which  were  not  for 
publication,  but  he  had  said  enough  in  his  public  discourses  to  show  this  little 
group  of  earnest  men  that  he  was  on  the  side  of  a  complete  break  with  the  Old 
Church.  Zwingli  was  a  very  cautious  person,  and  while  he  saw  plainly  that  his 
opinions  led  logically  to  very  radical  reforms,  he  wished  to  make  haste  slowly 
and  come  at  the  changes,  which  he  knew  would  cause  considerable  sorrow  to 
many  conservative  people,  by  successive  steps;  but  the  little  group  referred  to 
wished  to  accompHsh  the  same  results  at  once,  without  tarrying  for  any,  and 
accordingly  they  started  out  without  first  preparing  the  people  for  such  action 
to  do  the  things  Zwingli  had  at  heart.  Thus  they  made  an  attack  upon 
churches  and  stripped  them  of  their  ornaments;  they  refused  to  observe  the 
church  fasts;  and  what  is  of  more  interest  in  this  connection,  they  declared 
that  the  baptism  of  infants  was  unscriptural,  and  therefore  should  not  be 
observed.  Zwingli  was  very  much  distressed  at  the  precipitance  of  his  enthu- 
siastic friends,  because  such  actions  were  on  the  side  of  disorder,  and  it  was 
very  important  to  guard  the  growing  Reformation  from  the  charge  of  disorderly 
conduct.  At  the  same  time  he  could  not  say  that  what  they  did  was  in  itself 
wrong,  as  he  had  himself  advocated  the  removal  of  all  ornaments  from  the 
churches,  and  it  is  doubtless  true  that  in  his  earlier  addresses  from  the  pulpit 
he  exposed  the  unbiblical  character  of  the  church  doctrine  upon  the  general 


124  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

SO  incapable  of  limiting  those  desires  that  they  prefer  to  perish 
themselves  and  to  destroy  others  rather  than  give  up  what  they 
have  begun.  An  example  of  this  is  furnished  during  the  life  of 
Christ  among  men,  and  this  is  repeated  now  in  our  times  when 
he  has  relit  the  torch  of  his  word,  doubtless  though  to  our  good. 

subject  of  baptism,  and  probable  that  he  inclined  towards  ruling  out  infant 
baptism,  as  lacking  biblical  support. 

The  foUowers  of  a  great  teacher  are  frequently  guilty  of  bringing  their  master 
into  compromising  situations,  because  they  make  prominent  what  he  thinks  of 
very  small  account,  although  it  may  be  in  the  line  of  his  teaching,  and  so  ZwdngU 
found  himself  criticised  severely  in  Zurich  when  his  remarks  upon  infant  baptism 
were  repeated.  To  those  who  were  brought  up  to  regard  baptism  as  necessary 
to  salvation  it  was  a  great  shock  to  be  told  that  the  ceremony  had  no  validity. 
To  those  who  believed  that  the  rite  of  baptism  was  the  Christian  obligation  in 
lieu  of  circumcision,  and  just  as  binding,  to  hear  that  there  was  grave  doubt 
whether  it  should  be  so  considered  was  to  knock  the  underpinning  from  their 
faith.  When  Zwingli  found  that  opposition  to  the  popular  belief  and  practice 
upon  this  point  meant  that  he  would  be  exposed  not  only  to  clerical  and  lay 
adverse  criticism,  but  probably  would  lose  him  his  influence  with  the  city  mag- 
istrates who  were  all  friends  of  the  Old  faith  on  this  doctrine,  he  devoted  a 
great  deal  of  attention  to  it,  with  the  result  that  he  convinced  himself  that  as 
to  the  subjects  of  baptism  he  had  been  wrong,  and  henceforth  he  took  the  ortho- 
dox side.  As  Zwingli  was  an  honest  man  and  morally  courageous,  his  change 
of  view  should  be  accepted  as  sincere,  and  not  as  time-serving  and  hypocritical. 
He  soon  had  a  chance  to  attack  his  former  friends  and  admirers  on  other  than 
speculative  grounds,  because  they  had  been  influenced  by  men  like  Thomas 
Muenzer  and  Balthasar  Hubmaier,  who  were  in  the  stream  of  the  Baptist 
movement  in  Germany.  Balthasar,  indeed,  developed  into  the  leading  theolo- 
gian of  the  Baptists  of  Switzerland.  From  Germany  the  idea  came  to  the  little 
company  of  Baptists  in  Zurich  to  practice  the  rite  of  baptism  upon  beheving 
adults  who  had  already,  as  the  Church  claimed,  been  baptized,  upon  the  theory 
that  only  those  could  be  baptized  truly  who  were  old  enough  to  have  at  the 
time  an  intelligent  comprehension  of  the  doctrines  to  which  they  were  giving 
assent,  and  as  this  could  not  have  been  the  case  with  those  "baptized"  in 
infancy,  therefore  they  had  never  really  been  baptized.  The  first  of  these  adult 
baptisms  occurred  in  a  gathering  of  these  Baptists  in  Zollicon,  a  little  \nllage  to 
the  east  of  Zurich,  and  was  by  pouring  from  a  dipper.  But  these  first  Baptists 
in  Switzeriand  cared  so  little  in  regard  to  the  mode  of  baptism  that  the  question 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  discussed  among  them,  and  in  the  writings  of 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 25 

Then  when  he  had  not  only  endured  the  betrayer  for  so  long  a 
time,  but  also  openly  dissuaded  or  terrified  him,  the  latter,  so  far 
from  giving  over  the  malicious  design  entered  upon,  of  giving 
up  master  and  parent,  did  not  cease  till  he  had  placed  the 
spirit  in  bonds.*     So  it  is  now,  when  the  audacity  of  the  Cata- 

Zwingli  is  not  referred  to.  This  is  a  curious  fact,  because  the  modern  Baptist 
church  lays  great  stress  upon  a  certain  mode  of  baptism. 

The  elaborate  attack  upon  the  Baptists  here  presented  derives  additional 
interest  from  the  two  documents  that  it  embodies.  The  first  is  the  attack  upon 
ZwingH  written  probably  by  Conrad  Grebel,  one  of  the  earliest  friends  of 
Zwingli,  and  the  second  is  the  Confession  of  Faith  written  by  the  Baptists  of 
Bern.  Zwingli  replies  to  both  these  documents,  quoting  them  verbally  and 
fully,  and  this  enables  us  to  reconstruct  them.  The  Confession  of  the  Bernese 
Baptists  is  in  very  simple  language,  showing  a  very  honest  and  God-fearing 
mind,  and  is  in  itself  a  triumphant  refutation  of  the  charges  of  fanaticism  and 
immorality  which  Zwingli  brings  against  them.  In  fact  in  this  paper  Zwingli 
shows  himself  up  in  a  very  bad  light. 

This  is  no  place  in  which  to  describe  the  outrageous  treatment  which  the 
Baptist  party  received  in  Zurich  and  elsewhere  through  Switzerland.  The 
writer  feels  the  freer  to  use  such  a  term  because  he  is  not  himself  a  Baptist,  but 
he  comes  to  the  subject  merely  as  a  historical  student.  He  considers  that  the 
part  which  Zwingli  played  in  this  wretched  business  is  a  serious  blot  upon  his 
reputation,  and  reveals  a  defect  in  his  character.  The  Baptists  were  pursued 
relentlessly;  drowning,  beheading,  burning  at  the  stake,  confiscation  of  prop- 
erty, exile,  fines  and  other  forms  of  social  obloquy  were  employed  to  suppress 
them  and  prevent  their  increase.  The  fact  shows  plainly  that  the  persecuting 
spirit  in  the  times  of  the  Reformation  was  just  as  rife  among  Protestants  as 
among  Roman  Catholics,  and  that  the  devil  was  abroad  in  the  hearts  of  those 
who  considered  themselves  on  both  sides  as  the  true  servants  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  whose  tenderness  and  love  must  have  been  greatly  tried  by  these 
wicked  doings  of  his  friends. 

Peace  came  at  last  to  Switzerland — the  peace  of  the  grave-yard  and  of  the 
sea  which  gives  not  up  its  dead.  The  orthodox  party  congratulated  them- 
selves upon  having  got  rid  of  the  pestilential  heresy  of  adult  baptism,  yet 
the  student  of  history  as  he  looks  upon  the  large,  flourishing  and  world-wide 
Baptist  church  of  to-day  asks  himself  which  side  really  won  the  battle  for  the 
right  of  private  judgment  and  liberty  of  action,  the  side  of  the  persecutor  or 
the  side  of  the  persecuted? 

*  /.  e.y  died  by  the  halter;  allusion  to  the  death  of  Judas. 


126  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

baptists  has  been  suffered  to  proceed  so  far  that  they  have 
conceived  the  hope  of  confounding  all  things ;  who  are  so  un- 
taught that  by  calling  themselves  by  this  name  they  would  in- 
crease their  estimation ;  so  imprudent  (while  Christ  would  have 
the  apostles  prudent  as  serpents)  that  the  confusion  which  alone 
they  are  eager  for  they  suppose  they  will  discover  by  means  of 
their  imprudence  rather  than  find  by  any  skill.  This  inauspicious 
race  of  men  has  so  increased  within  a  few  years  *  that  they  now 
cause  anxiety  to  certain  cities. t  And  this  in  no  other  way  than 
through  unskilled  and  impious  audacity.  For  while  pious  learn- 
ing and  discipline  has  no  need  of  the  ministry  of  hypocrisy  (for 
it  is  sufficient  unto  itself  through  erudition,  and  by  the  very  un- 
affected discipline  of  piety  commends  itself  to  others),  yet  men 
of  this  kind  are  so  thoroughly  ignorant  of  that  which  they  boast 
they  alone  know  (and),  so  pretend  that  from  which  they  are 
farther  distant  than  the  hall  of  Pluto  from  the  palace  of  Jove, 
that  it  is  clear  that  they  begin  this  web  endowed  with  nothing 
but  impious  and  untaught  audacity.  For  as  often  as  by  the  use 
of  clear  passages  of  Scripture  they  are  driven  to  the  point  of  hav- 
ing to  say,  I  yield,  straightway  they  talk  about  "  the  spirit "  and 
deny  Scripture.  As  if  indeed  the  heavenly  spirit  were  ignorant 
of  the  sense  of  Scripture  which  is  written  under  its  guidance  or 
were  anywhere  inconsistent  with  itself.  And  if  you  rightly  and 
modestly  call  in  question  their  customs  and  institutions,  even  if 
you  come  as  a  suppliant  and  beg  them  to  do  nothing  rashly, 
there  is  no  abuse  employed  by  the  enemies  of  the  Gospel  these 
do  not  use,  no  threats  they  do  not  throw  at  you.  What  does  all 
this  mean,  I  ask,  if  it  is  not  the  sign  of  audacity  and  impious 
confidence?  Since  there  is  so  rich  a  harvest  of  these — not  men 
(for  why  must  one  call  those  men  who  have  nothing  but  the 

*  Since  1523. 

tWaldshut,  Zurich,  St.  Gall,  Schaffhausen,  Basel,  Coire,  Constance,  Strass- 
burg,  Worms,  Ulm. 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST^  TRICKS.  1 27 

human  form?),  but  monsters  of  deceit — that  now  the  good  seed 
which  the  heavenly  Father  so  lately  sowed  in  his  field  must  be 
on  its  guard,  I  beg  this,  that  we  watch,  act,  and  not  let  the  enemy 
overthrow  us  as  we  sleep.  Let  us  judge  soberly,  lest  we  receive 
a  wolf  in  sheep's  clothing.  Let  us  labor,  lest  that  evil  that  has 
arisen  be  attributed  to  our  neglect.  For  there  are,  alas,  not  a 
few  among  us  who  are  stricken  and  moved  by  every  wind  and 
novelty,  just  like  the  untaught  rabble  which  embraces  a  thing  the 
more  quickly  the  more  unknown  it  is.  The  Catabaptists  speak 
in  round  tones  of  God,  truth,  the  Word,  light,  spirit,  holiness, 
flesh,  falsehood,  impiety,  desire,  demon,  hell  and  all  that  kind  of 
things,  not  only  beautifully,  but  even  grandly  and  finely,  if  only 
hypocrisy  were  more  surely  absent.  If  also  you  should  investi- 
gate their  life,  at  the  first  contact  it  seems  innocent,  divine, 
democratic,  popular,  nay,  supermundane,  for  it  is  thought  more 
noble  than  human  even  by  those  who  think  not  illiberally  of  them- 
selves. But  when  you  have  penetrated  into  the  interior  you  find 
such  a  pest  as  it  is  shame  even  to  mention.  For  it  is  not  suffi- 
cient for  them  to  abuse  the  Gospel  for  gain  and  to  live  at  the 
expense  of  another,  and  to  give  themselves  up  to  such  base 
cunning  for  the  sake  of  their  belly,  weaving  plot  out  of  plot,  but 
they  must  not  only  assail,  but  even  destroy,  the  faith  of  matrons 
and  girls  from  whose  husbands  and  parents  they  obtain  hospi- 
tality. And  not  contented  with  all  this,  they  refuse  to  pronounce 
and  recognize  as  wicked  the  hand  made  bloody  at  St.  Gall  with  a 
cruel  parricide,  so  that  you  see  witnout  difficulty  that  the  same 
thing  is  to  be  expected  from  their  assemblages  (which  are  both 
nocturnal  and  solitary),  which  once  at  Rome  improperly  idle 
matrons  when  they  had  gained  possession  of  a  certain  paltry 
Greek  perpetrated  in  their  subterranean  meetings.  And  although 
all  those  deeds  are  in  part  so  wicked  and  unworthy  of  good  men, 
in  part  so  obscene  and  impure,  and  in  part  so  monstrous  and 
cruel,  that  they  would  hand  this  age  down  to  posterity  as  infam- 
ous, even  though  there    were    no    other  calamity;  nevertheless 


128  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

great  as  they  are,  they  are  insignificant  in  that  they  confined  the 
contumely  within  human  bounds,  as  compared  with  these  which 
they  are  guilty  of  against  the  piety  that  regards  both  Christ  and 
public  morals.  They  deny  that  Christ  himself  perfected  forever 
his  saints  in  his  one  offering  of  himself.  But  what  is  this  but 
drawing  from  heaven  God's  Son  who  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  the 
Father?  And  when  they  have  cast  him  from  his  kingdom,  in 
whose  name,  pray,  shall  they  be  baptized?  Does  not  the  whole 
New  Testament  tend  to  this,  that  we  should  learn  that  Christ  is 
our  successful  sacrifice  and  redemption?  Out  of  what  books  do 
the  Catabaptists  draw  their  doctrine?  When  therefore  they 
thoroughly  deny  the  sum  of  the  New  Testament,  do  we  not  see 
them  using  catabaptism,  not  to  the  glory  of  God  or  with  the 
good  of  their  consciences,  but  as  a  pretext  for  seditions,  confu- 
sion and  tumult,  which  things  alone  they  hatch  out?  With  folly 
does  he  boast  the  baptism  of  Christ  who  denies  Christ.  It  is  to 
no  purpose  that  they  say  after  the  manner  of  the  Jews  (some  of 
whom  we  know  do  this)  that  Christ  was  a  great  prophet  or  a 
man  of  God,  but  not  the  Son  of  God,  for  he  can  be  neither  a 
prophet  nor  a  man  of  God  who  brings  a  lie  to  wretched  mortals 
— in  which  (lies)  they  abound  to  more  than  a  sufficiency.  But 
Christ  asserted  that  he  was  the  Son  of  God ;  on  account  of  this 
he  died ;  he  therefore  could  not  have  lied  when  he  said  he  was 
God's  Son  if  he  was  a  true  prophet  or  a  man  of  God.  How  is 
it  that  the  apostles  baptized  in  Jesus'  name  when  he  had  given 
them  the  formula,  "  In  the  name  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  and 
the  Holy  Spirit?'  Jesus  must  be  equal,  nay,  the  same  as  Father, 
Son  and  Holy  Spirit.  For  John,  great  as  he  was,  and  prophet 
and  man  of  God,  did  not  baptize  in  his  own  name.  In  brief, 
then,  when  they  clearly  deny  that  Christ  is  by  nature  the  Son  of 
God,  it  is  through  evil  design  that  they  rage  about  baptism,  and 
not  for  zeal's  sake.  Morals  they  corrupted  in  the  following 
manner :  No  matter  what  crime  they  are  caught  in  committing, 
even  in  the  very  act  (for  in  their  church  so  unstained  shameful 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 29 

deeds,  adultery,  parricide,  perjury,  theft,  evil,  guile,  and  about  all 
crimes  there  are  anywhere,  are  more  common  than  among  those 
whom  they  call  for  contumely  "  the  flesh  and  the  devil."  I  tell 
the  truth,  I  lie  not ;  there  is  none  of  these  that  I  cannot 
abundantly  prove  if  the  occasion  demands) — In  whatsoever  sin 
they  are  taken,  I  say,  they  escape  in  no  other  way  than :  I  have 
not  sinned,  for  I  am  no  longer  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  spirit;  I 
am  dead  to  the  flesh,  and  the  flesh  to  me.  Do  they  not  betray 
what  they  are  by  this  reply?  For  how  can  they  who  are  led  by 
the  Spirit  of  God  and  are  sons  of  God  allure  to  adultery  a 
matron's  chastity?  With  what  face  offer  insult  to  a  simple  little 
maiden  !  What  an  insult  to  God  is  this  !  What  a  handle  this 
for  those  who  would  already  have  given  themselves  from  the  lust 
of  the  flesh  to  all  vice  if  shame  alone  had  not  opposed  !  Will 
not  the  homicide  share  with  the  rake  and  adulterer,  when 
accused,  the  formula,  "  I  am  now  of  the  Spirit ;  the  wrong 
done  here  is  not  mine,  but  is  of  the  flesh."  What  shame,  pray, 
will  be  left  us?  What  regard  for  modesty?  For  they  do  not 
reply  with  the  same  mind  as  do  we  ordinarily  who  trust  in  Christ. 
For  we  frankly  confess :  I  have  sinned,  I  will  correct  the  error,  I 
will  flee  through  Christ  to  the  mercy  of  God,  from  this  I  will 
never  fall.  For  they  do  not  refer  to  Christ ;  they  have  put  off 
all  shame,  and  what  will  he  correct  who  denies  that  he  has  fallen? 
O,  the  crime,  the  audacity,  the  impudence  !  What  swine  of  the 
school  of  Epicurus  ever  thus  philosophized?  Or  what  difference 
is  there  between  right  and  wrong,  O  heaven,  between  holy  and 
crime-laden,  man  and  beast?  If  you  take  away  shame  from 
humanity,  have  you  not  admitted  to  the  theatre  all  obscenity, 
have  you  not  eliminated  law,  corrupted  morals?  You  are  not 
ashamed  at  slaughter,  adultery,  harlotry ;  you  are  more  a  beast 
than  the  wolf,  lion  or  horse,  which  have  some  shame.  Against 
this  class  of  men  we  must  be  on  constant  watch,  all  our  forces 
and  machines  must  be  brought,  my  brethren,  and  the  more 
because  they  rage  so  in  their  hypocrisy  and  perfidy.     They  excel 


130  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

in  this  Empusa,  Proteus,  the  chameleon,  or  Tarandus,*  or  whatever 
is  inconstant.  By  this  they  assert  that  the  papal  party  will  bring 
them  aid — this  openly.  They  assail  far  more  sharply  than  do 
the  Romanists  all  who  stand  by  Christ,  by  which  they  evince  to 
what  purpose  they  spare  those  whom  they  so  anxiously  flatter. 
But  all  our  material  cannot  and  must  not  be  sought  elsewhere 
than  from  the  armory  of  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament.  Do 
thou,  Father  of  lights,  illumine  their  darkness,  that  they  may  see 
their  error,  and  as  thou  wilt  sometime  do,  eliminate  this  error 
from  the  Church  quickly,  we  pray  !  But  thou,  whosoever  thou 
art,  who  boastest  in  the  name  or  ministry  of  the  Most  High  God 
or  of  the  gospel  of  His  Son,  consider  what  and  whence  these 
matters  are  which  we  allege,  and  laying  passion  aside  furnish 
the  herb  of  truth.  Farewell ! 
Zurich,  July  ji,  1^27. 

HULDREICH    ZWINGLl'S    REFUTATION   AGAINST   THE    TRICKS    OF    THE, 

CATABAPTISTS. 

Thus  far  our  preface.  Now  hear  in  what  order  we  shall 
proceed.  First,  we  shall  reply  to  their  calumnies,  in  which  they 
assert  they  have  confuted  our  fundamental  arguments.  Secondly, 
I  shall  overthrow  the  basis  of  their  superstition.  Then  I  shall 
discuss  the  covenant  and  the  election  of  God,  which  abides  firm 
and  is  above  baptism  and  circumcision ;  nay,  above  faith  and 
preaching.  I  shall  add  an  appendix,  in  which,  with  the  help  of 
God,  I  shall  refute  certain  errors  recently  wrought  out  by  them. 
But  all  with  a  hght  hand.     In  the  first  two  parts  I  shall  always 

*  Empusa  was  a  spectre  of  huge  size,  having  one  leg  of  brass  and  one  Hke 
that  of  an  ass,  sent  out  by  Hecate  to  frighten  travelers.  It  ate  human  flesh. 
It  sometimes  appeared  as  a  beautiful  young  woman.  Proteus  was  the  Old  Man 
of  the  Sea,  who  rose  at  noonday  from  the  flood,  came  on  land  and  fell  asleep 
among  the  rocks.  If  any  one  could  catch  him  there  and  hold  on  to  him,  not- 
withstanding his  efforts  to  escape  by  changing  his  form,  he  would  be  able  to  learn 
from  him  the  future  with  infallible  accuracy.  Taratidus  was  a  horned  animal 
of  Northern  lands,  perhaps  the  reindeer. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST    TRICKS.  I3I 

put    their   words    first,   faithfuly    translated   from    German    into 
Latin ;  after  that  the  reply.     Thus  then  they  begin  : 

The  Catabaptists.  One^jof_Zwingli's  grounds  for  advocating^ 
the  baptism  of  infants  is  the  fainily  of  Stephanas.  For  he  says  : 
It  is  more  Hkely  thg^n  not  that  the  apostles  baptized  the  children 
of  the  faithful,  for  Paul  says,  i  Cor.  i.  i6.  And  I  baptized  also 
the  household  of  Stephanas ;  a  second  is  in  Acts  xvi.  15,  when 
^y3i^Y.?^k9Jitiz&dji^B^dJ;ie  a  third  in  verse  3^^,  a  little  after, 

And  h£jwas_j)apjized,„he^^^^  straightway-     In  these 

famjliesj^t^js^^io^re^li^kelxtha^^^^^         that  there  were  infanls.--~-Thus,. 
iajjhey. 

Before  I  go  to  the  regular  reply,  I  would  warn  thee  of  one  thing, 
O  reader.  This  work  is  called  a  "  Refutation  of  the  Tricks,  etc.,'* 
because  this  class  of  men  so  abounds  and  works  in  tricks  that  I 
have  never  seen  anything  equally  oily  or  changeable.  Yet  this 
is  not  wonderful.  For  add  to  their  asseverations  of  holiness,  which 
they  are  skilled  in  working  up,  their  readiness  in  making  fictions 
and  scattering  them,  and  (you  see)  how  they  deceive  not  only 
the  simple,  but  even  the  elect,  divine  providence  thus  proving 
its  own.  The  book  containing  the  refutation  of  our  positions  * 
they  had  for  a  long  time  been  passing  through  the  hands  of  their 
brotherhood,  who  everywhere  boasted  that  they  could  so  tear  up 
Zwingli's  positions  that  there  would  be  nothing  left.  I  had 
meanwhile  been  looking  and  searching  everywhere  to  see  if  I 

*'*As  appears  from  the  letter  of  Qicolampadius  to  Zwingli,  dated  July  19, 
1527  (Zwingli's  Works,  viii.  80),  it  is  probable  that  the  writing  which  called 
out  the  answers  of  Qicolampadius  and  Zwingli  had  the  title:  "  Ein  Gesprech 
Balthasar  Hubemors  von  Fridberg.  Doctors,  auff  Mayster  Ulrichs  Zwinglens 
ze  Ziirich  Taufbiiechlein.  von  dem  Khindertauff.  Die  warhayt  is  untodtlich. 
Erd.  erd.  erd.  hore  das  wort  des  herrens.  Hiere."  Nicholspurg  1526  (quarto). 
Zwingli's  book  on  Baptism  ("  Vom  Touf,  vom  widertouf  und  vom  kindertouf"), 
appeared  May  27  1525.     It  is  in  his  Works,  ii.  i,  230-303. 

On  July  nth  in  that  year  Hubmeier  issued  his  "Von  dem  christlichen 
Tauf  der  Glaubigen,"  to  which  Zwingli  replied  by  his  "  Uiber  doctor  Bal- 
thazars toufbiichlin  wahrhafte  griindte  antwurt  (1525)  Works,  ii.  i,  337-369. 


132  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

could  get  it,  but  could  find  it  nowhere,  until  CEcolampadius,  a 
most  upright  man,  and  also  most  vigilant,  found  one  somewhere 
and  sent  it  to  me.  So  the  first  trick  was  that  they  sent  around 
their  own  writings,  which  through  their  seared  consciences  they 
knew  could  not  endure  the  hght,  secretly  by  the  hands  of  the 
conspirators,  who  are  as  purblind  in  their  ignorance  as  they  are 
blind  in  their  desire  to  advance  the  sect.  They  did  not  allow  it 
to  come  into  other  hands.  But  the  evil-doer  cometh  not  into 
the  light  lest  his  works  be  manifest.  But  how  could  they  submit 
their  works  to  the  church  when  they  have  secedtd  from  the 
church?  For  you  must  know,  most  pious  reader,  that  their  sect 
arose  thus.  When  their  leaders,  clearly  fanatics,  had  already 
determined  to  drag  into  carnal  liberty  the  liberty  we  have  in  the 
gospel,  they  addressed  us  who  administer  the  word  at  Zurich 
first,*  kindly,  indeed,  but  firmly,  so  that  so  far  as  could  be  seen 
from  their  appearance  and  action  it  was  clear  that  they  had  in 
mind  something  inauspicious.  They  addressed  us  therefore  after 
the  following  manner :  It  does  not  escape  us  that  there  will  ever 
be  those  who  will  oppose  the  gospel,  even  among  those  who  boast 
in  the  name  of  Christ.  We  therefore  can  never  hope  that  all 
minds  will  so  unite  as  Christians  should  find  it  possible  to  live. 
For  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  those  who  had  believed  seceded 
from  the  others,  and  then  it  happened  that  they  who  came  to 
believe  went  over  to  those  who  were  now  a  new  church.  So  then 
must  we  do  :  they  beg  that  we  make  a  deliverance  to  this  effect 
— they  who  wish  to  follow  Christ  should  stand  on  our  side.  They 
promise  also  that  our  forces  shall  be  far  superior  to  the  army  of 
the  unbeHeving.  Now  the  church  was  about  to  elect  from  their 
own  devout  its  own  senate.  For  it  was  clear  that  there  were 
many  impious  ones  both  in  the  senate  and  in  this  promiscuous 
church.  To  this  we  rephed  in  the  following  manner  :  It  is  indeed 
true  that  there  would  ever  be  those  who  would  live  unrighteously, 

*  In  1524.     Cf.  for  these  matters  Zwingli,  Works,  ii.  I,  230  sqq.,  370  sqq. 
II.,  pp.  370  ff  and  230  ff. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 33 

even  though  they  confessed  Christ,  and  would  have  all  innocence 
and  therefore  piety  in  contempt.  Yet  when  they  asserted  and 
contended  that  they  were  Christians,  and  were  such  by  their 
deeds — as  even  the  church  could  endure — they  were  on  our  side. 
For  who  is  not  against  us  is  on  our  side. 

So  Christ  himself  had  taught  in  just  such  beginnings  of  things 
as  were  then  ours.  He  had  also  commanded  us  to  let  the  tares 
grow  with  the  grain  until  the  day  of  harvest,  but  we  hoped  boldly 
more  would  return  daily  to  a  sound  mind  who  now  had  it  not.  If 
this  should  not  be,  yet  the  pious  might  ever  live  among  the  im- 
pious. I  feared  that  in  that  condition  of  affairs  a  secession 
would  cause  some  confusion.  The  example  of  the  apostles  was 
not  applicable  here,  for  those  from  whom  they  withdrew  did  not 
confess  Christ,  but  now  ours  did.  .  A  great  part  of  those  would 
be  unwilling  to  consent  with  us  to  any  secession,  even  though 
they  embraced  Christ  more  ardently  than  we  ourselves.  By  the 
continuous  action  of  the  word  that  alone  should  be  promulgated 
which  all  ought  to  know,  unless  they  wished  to  be  wanting  to 
their  own  salvation.  I  did  not  doubt  that  without  disorder  the 
number  of  the  believing  would  ever  grow  larger  by  the  unremit- 
ting administration  of  the  word,  not  by  the  disruption  of  the  body 
into  many  parts.  That  although  the  senate  seemed  to  them  to 
be  of  very  varying  complexion,  we  were  not  of  that  mind. 
Especially  because,  while  nothing  humane  seemed  alien  to  them, 
yet  they  frankly  not  only  did  not  oppose  the  word,  but  they 
favored  it  equally  with  that  Jehoshaphat  who  strengthened  with  his 
cohorts  by  the  law  itself  the  priests  and  Levites  that  they  might 
the  more  freely  preach  the  word  through  all  Judea.  Yet  one 
should  especially  observe  that  there  were  ten  virgins  awaiting  the 
bridegroom,  but  five  of  them  were  wise  and  prudent  and  five 
were  slothful  and  foohsh.  Rephes  on  this  line  we  made  to  them 
as  they  urged  us,  and  they  saw  they  would  not  succeed.  They 
brought  up  other  matters.  They  denounced  infant  baptism 
tremendously  as  the  chief  abomination,  proceeding  from  an  evil 


134  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

demon  and  the  Roman  pontiff.  We  met  this  attack  at  once, 
promised  an  amicable  conference.  It  was  appointed  for  Tuesday 
of  each  week.  At  the  first  meeting  the  battle  was  sharp  but 
without  abuse,  as  we  especially  took  in  good  part  their  insults. 
Let  God  be  the  witness  and  those  who  were  present,  as  well  from 
their  side  as  from  ours.  The  second  was  sharper.  Some  of 
them,  since  they  could  do  nothing  with  Scripture,  carried  on  the 
affair  with  open  abuse.  When  they  saw  themselves  beaten  after 
a  considerable  conflict,  and  when  we  had  exhorted  them  in 
friendly  ways,  we  broke  up  in  such  a  way  that  many  of  them 
promised  they  would  make  no  disturbance;  though  they  did  not 
promise  to  give  up  their  opinions.  Within  three,  or  at  most  four, 
days  it  was  announced  that  the  leaders  of  the  sect  had  baptized 
fifteen  brethren.  Then  we  began  to  perceive  why  they  had  deter- 
mined to  collect  a  new  church  and  had  opposed  infant  baptism 
so  seriously.  We  warned  the  church  that  it  could  not  be  main- 
tained, that  this  proceeded  from  good  counsel,  to  say  nothing  of 
a  good  spirit,  and  for  these  reasons :  They  had  attempted  a 
division  and  partition  of  the  church,  and  this  was  just  as  hypo- 
critical as  the  superstition  of  the  monks.  Secondly,  though  the 
churches  had  to  preserve  their  liberty  of  judging  concerning 
doctrine,  they  had  set  up  catabaptism  without"  any  conference, 
for  during  the  whole  battle  about  infant  baptism  they  had  said 
nothing  about  catabaptism.  Third,  this  catabaptism  seemed 
like  the  watchword  of  seditious  men.  Then  when  they  learned 
this  in  great  swarms  they  came  into  the  city,  unbelted  and  girded 
with  rope  or  osiers,  and  prophesied,  as  they  called  it,  in  the 
market  place  and  squares.  They  filled  the  air  with  their  cries 
about  the  old  dragon,  as  they  called  me,  and  his  heads,  as  they 
called  the  other  ministers  of  the  word.  They  also  commended 
their  justice  and  innocence  to  all,  for  they  were  about  to  depart. 
They  boasted  that  already  they  hold  all  things  in  common,  and 
threatened  with  extremes  others  unless  they  do  the  same.  They 
went  through  the  streets  with  portentous  uproar,  crying  Woe  ! 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  135 

Woe  !  Woe  to  Zurich.  Some  imitated  Jonah,  and  gave  a  truce  of 
forty  days  to  the  city.  What  need  of  more?  I  should  be  more 
fooHsh  than  they  were  I  even  to  name  all  their  audacity.  But  we 
who  by  the  bounty  of  God  stood  firmly  by  the  sound  doctrine  of 
Christ,  although  throughout  the  city  one  counseled  one  way  and 
another  the  other,  we  believed  we  should  teach  correctly  the  proof 
of  the  Spirit.  Something  was  accomplished  in  this  way,  although 
they  changed  themselves  into  all  shapes  that  they  might  not  be 
caught.  When  the  evil  had  somewhat  subsided,  so  that  the  ma- 
jority seemed  likely  to  judge  the  matter  impassively,  joint  meetings 
were  appointed.  But  as  often  as  we  met,  either  publicly  or  pri- 
vately, the  truth  that  we  had  on  our  side  ever  came  off  conqueror. 
They  promised  then  that  they  would  prove  by  blood  what  they 
could  not  by  Scripture.  They  did  this  with  so  great  boldness 
and  boasting  that  I  do  not  doubt  they  were  a  burden  to  them- 
selves. They  practiced  catabaptism  contrary  to  the  will  of  the 
senate  and  people,  the  public  servants  and  police  were  turned 
back  and  some  of  them  harshly  treated.  Finally  a  meeting  was 
appointed*  where  each  side  should  be  heard  to  completeness,  and 
when  they  were  brought  from  the  prison  to  the  court  or  were 
taken  back  again  one  would  pity  the  city  and  another  would  make 
dire  threats  against  it.  Here  hypocrisy  tried  its  full  strength, 
but  accomplished  nothing.  While  some  womanish  breasts  be- 
wailed and  turned  to  pity,  yet  the  truth,  publicly  vindicated, 
came  off  best.  For  all  were  allowed  to  be  present  during  the 
whole  three  days'  fight.  When  finally  their  impudence,  though 
beaten  also  at  that  meeting,  would  not  yield,  an  opportunity  was 
again  given  them  to  fight.t  In  the  presence  of  the  church  the 
contest  raged  for  three  whole  days  more,  with  so  great  damage 
to  them  that  there  were  few  who  did  not  see  that  the  wretched 
people  were  struggling  for  the  sake  of  fighting,  and  not  to  find 
the  truth.     By  this  battle   their  forces  were  so  cut  up  that  we 

*  The  first  was  held  Jan.  17,  1525. 
-t  On  March  20,  1525. 


136  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

began  to  have  much  more  tranquility,  especially  in  the  city,  but 
they  wandered  through  the  country  by  night  and  infested  all  ta 
the  best  of  their  opportunity.  After  that  conference  (the  tenth, 
with  the  others  public  or  private,)  the  senate  decreed  that  he 
should  be  drowned  who  rebaptized  another.  Perhaps  I  obtrude 
these  details  upon  you  to  your  great  disgust,  good  reader ;  but  it 
is  not  heat  or  bias  that  has  influenced  me,  only  a  faithful  watch- 
fulness and  solicitude  for  the  churches.  For  many  of  the  breth- 
ren who  had  not  discovered  the  character  of  these  men  thought 
that  what  had  been  done  to  them  was  too  monstrous.  But  now 
when  these  people  have  begun  to  devastate  their  own  sheep- 
folds,  they  are  daily  assailing  us  with  letters  and  shouts,  confess- 
ing that  what  they  had  heard  was  more  than  true,  that  they  who 
have  not  had  experience  of  this  evil  may  now  be  rendered  the 
more  watchful.  I  think  that  the  world  has  never  seen  a  similar 
kind  of  hypocrisy.  For  as  knowledge  without  love  puffs  up,  so 
when  conjoined  with  hypocrisy  it  is  bolder  than  one  of  the  people 
would  think,  and  more  adroit  than  even  an  astute  man  would 
apprehend  The  hypocrisy  of  the  monks  was  crude,  and  they 
discoursed  of  divine  things,  if  at  all,  in  coldest  fashion.  But  these 
men  further  act  in  such  a  way  that  they  do  not  persuade  or  induce 
those  whom  they  find  thrown  in  their  way ;  they  assail  and  rush 
on  them.  So  these  wretched  fellows  just  undertake  I  know  not 
what  beyond  their  powers ;  they  assail  the  magistrates  in  terrible 
fashion;  they  devote  to  destruction  the  ministers  of  the  gospel; 
on  all  sides  they  act  like  Alexander  the  false  prophet — he  would 
not  have  Epicureans  or  Christians  at  his  tricky  performances. 
For  as  those  in  the  magistracy  command  great  wisdom  and 
kowledge  of  affairs,  so  also  they  who  worthily  preside  over  the 
ministry  of  the  gospel  ought  to  be  established  in  sound  doctrine, 
so  as  to  be  able  to  overcome  the  contumacy  of  those  who  con- 
tradict it.  Now  see  the  astuteness  of  these  men.  They  revile 
especially  the  ministers,  both  of  the  church  and  the  state,  so 
that  if  ever  one  in  accordance  with  duty  even  whispers  against 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  137 

them  they  straightway  are  able  to  say  they  are  hostile  to  them 
because  they  have  assailed  their  vices.  Now  any  one  of  the 
people  who  hears  this  will  suspect  the  ministers  of  the  church 
and  the  magistrates  before  he  does  these  many-colored  deceivers  : 
aroused  to  fury  they  charge  forward  at  their  command,  ignorant 
whither  they  are  rushing  or  to  what  end  they  will  come.  Impu- 
dence and  audacity  increase,  so  that  he  who  to-day  is  a  simple 
hearer  will  to-morrow  abuse  the  magistrate  to  his  face.  When  it 
is  seen  whither  their  increase  is  tending  and  resistance  is  made, 
straightway  he  who  is  the  instigator  departs  from  the  midst  and 
leaves  the  miserable  people  to  be  mangled  by  the  executioner. 
And  they  present  a  parallel  to  Ate  :*  whithersoever  they  turn  all 
is  woe ;  they  overturn  everything  and  change  things  into  the 
worst  condition  possible.  Some  city  begins  to  think  more 
soundly  about  heavenly  teaching ;  thither  they  proceed  and  bring 
confusion ;  they  do  not  introduce  the  Lord  to  those  which  do 
not  receive  the  word.  Who  does  not  discern  from  this  whose 
apostles  they  are?  Therefore  establish  your  courage,  good 
brethren.  The  hypocrisy  of  the  Roman  pope  has  been  brought 
into  the  light ;  now  we  must  war  with  hypocrisy  itself.  And  you 
must  do  this  with  the  less  delay  the  more  you  see  those  apostles 
of  the  devil,  although  they  promise  I  know  not  what  salvation, 
seeking  nothing  but  disturbance  and  the  confusion  of  affairs,  both 
human  and  divine,  and  destruction.  So  much  about  their  division 
and  betrayal  of  the  church.  They  have  gone  out  from  us,  for 
they  were  not  of  us.  Yet  I  may  add  this  one  item  :  there  is  a 
small  church  at  Zolliconf  where  the  catabaptists  set  up  their 
teaching  under  inauspicious  beginnings.  This  church,  though 
small  (for  it  is  a  part  of  the  Zurich  church,  only  five  miles  out), 
is  admirable  in  its  constancy.  For  now  they  have  about  over- 
come the  catabaptists  born  among  them,  having  ever  embraced 

*  The  daughter  of  Zeus,  who  induced  gods  and  men  to  do  rash  and  incon- 
siderate things. 

"f  On  the  north  shore  of  the  Lake  of  Zurich,  and  five  miles  from  the  city. 
10 


H^S  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

the  word  with  simplicity  and  placidity.  This  opportunity  these 
[catabaptists]  had  eagerly  looked  for,  hoping  that  on  this  account 
the  men  would  the  more  readily  yield  to  their  hypocrisy  because 
they  displayed  such  great  simplicity  and  eagerness. 

Now  I  return  to  their  tricks,  and  thus  I  respond ;  When  you 
say  that  the  family  of  Stephanas  is  one  of  Zwingli's  bases  for 
insisting  on  infant  baptism,  you  show  great  disingenuousness. 
For  where,  pray,  have  I  ever  postulated  this,  which  you  assert, 
as  a  foundation?  Have  I  not  written  a  special  book  to  the 
unfaithful  Balthasar,*  the  apostate,  in  which  I  briefly  showed  upon 

*  Balthasar  Hubmaier  was  born  at  Friedberg,  near  Augsburg,  about  1480, 
educated  at  Freiburg  in  South  Germany,  became  professor  of  theology  at  Ingol- 
stadt,  and  D.  D.,  1512.  In  15 16  he  went  to  Regensburg  as  cathedral  preacher 
and  led  the  attack  on  the  Jews,  whose  synagogue  was  destroyed.  On  its  site  a 
Christian  chapel  was  erected,  and  he  was  its  first  chaplain.  In  1 52 1  he  removed 
to  Waldshut,  near  the  border  of  Switzerland,  and  this  brought  him  in  contact  with 
the  Swiss  Reformers.  He  embraced  their  teachings  and  introduced  the  Refor- 
mation into  Waldshut,  1524.  In  that  year  Hubmaier  came  under  the  infiu- 
•ence  of  Thomas  Miinzer,  who  confirmed  him  in  the  Baptist  views  he  had 
previously  independently  imbibed  from  his  Bible  study.  His  accession  to  the 
ranks  of  the  Baptists  was  a  great  gain  of  them.  He  was  quickly  recognized 
as  their  leading  theologian.  Driven  out  of  Waldshut  in  December,  1525,  when 
the  city  was  captured  by  the  Austrian  troops  and  the  Reformation  suppressed, 
Hubmaier  fled  to  Zurich.  But  his  Baptist  views  made  him  suspected  there,  as 
the  Baptists,  or  Anabaptists  as  they  were  commonly  called,  were  charged  with 
•disturbing  the  public  order  and  were  under  the  ban  of  the  State.  Hubmaier  was 
put  in  prison,  tortured,  compelled  to  recant,  and  finally  driven  out  of  the  city. 
He  went  to  Constance,  to  Augsburg  and  finally  into  Moravia,  everywhere  pro- 
claiming with  eloquence  and  success  by  voice  and  pen  his  Baptist  views.  There 
was  in  those  times,  when  religious  liberty  was  a  term  unknown  to  Protestants 
and  Roman  Catholics,  and  when  Baptists  especially  were'  hunted  to  death  by 
all  non-Baptists,  only  one  possible  end  to  such  a  career  as  his.  He  came  into 
the  hands  of  King  Ferdinand  of  Austria,  was  taken  to  Vienna,  1527,  and  there 
burnt  at  the  stake,  March  10,  1528.  He  died  like  a  hero.  His  wife,  who 
courageously  exhorted  him  to  firmness,  was  herself  put  to  death  three  days  later, 
only  it  was  through  the  waves  of  the  blue  Danube  and  not  through  fire  that  she 
entered  the  presence  of  the  Master  who  looks  with  pity  and  forgiving  love  upon 
His  followers'  vain  attempt  to  bring  in  His  kmgdom  by  the  sword.  The  life  of 
Hubmaier  has  been  written  from  the  sources  by  Johann  Loserth,  Briinn,  1893. 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 39 

what  bases  I  strive  in  defending  infant  baptism?     In  this  book 
do  you  not  read  : 

On  the  Baptis7n  of  Infants, 

I.  The  children  of  Christians  are  no  less  sons  of  God  than  the 
parents,  just  as  in  the  Old  Testament.  Hence,  since  they  are 
sons  of  God,  who  will  forbid  their  baptism? 

Circumcision  among  the  ancients  (so  far  as  it  was  sacramental) 
was  the  same  as  baptism  with  us.  As  that  was  given  to  infants 
so  ought  baptism  to  be  administered  to  infants. 

II.  But  perhaps  you  have  not  read  it,  for  in  your  superstition 
this  is  the  first  point,  that  he  whom  you  wish  to  render  doubly 
worse  than  he  was  may  not  unite  with  that  church  that  has  as 
bishops  those  who  defend  infant  baptism.  So  I  do  not  doubt 
that  they  have  placed  under  interdict  my  books.  My  mention 
of  the  household  of  Stephanas,  Lydia  and  of  the  keeper  of  the 
prison  came  about  in  the  following  way :  I  was  giving  you  many 
warnings  not  to  argue  unskillfully  thus :  We  do  not  read  that  the 
apostles  baptized  the  infants  of  behevers,  therefore  [infants] 
ought  not  to  be  baptized.  Firsty  because  of  the  absurdity, 
because  we  might  just  as  well  argue,  the  apostles  are  nowhere 
said  to  have  been  baptized,  therefore  they  were  not  baptized. 
And  when  you  replied,  it  is  most  likely  they  were  baptized  long 
before  they  baptized  others,  then  I  rephed  :  It  was  too  true  what 
Christ  set  forth,  that  some  see  a  mote  in  a  brother's  eye  and  are 
deceived  as  to  the  beam  in  their  own.  But  when  I  had  said  that 
it  was  more  likely  than  not  that  the  apostles  baptized  believers' 
infants,  what  laughter  and  mockery  did  not  the  faithless  apostate 
Balthasar  excite  against  me?  Those  are  the  columns,  he  says, 
and  they  bring  no  other  Scripture  but  futile  conjecture ;  we 
demand  clear  Scripture.  See  the  crafty  fellows  !  In  the  sam 
matter  they  reply  by  conjectures  and  laugh  at  others  who  adduce 
conjecture  simply  as  conjecture ;  nay,  they  falsely  assert  among 


I40  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

themselves  that  we  use  conjecture  as  a  foundation.  After  that  I 
very  properly  adduced  as  exampes,  which  showed  it  was  more 
probable  than  not  that  the  apostles  baptized  infants,  the  families 
of  Stephanas,  Lydia  and  of  the  warden  of  the  prison.  And  these 
examples  you  will  never  be  able  to  do  away  with,  as  I  shall  clearly 
show.     You  then  continue  to  answer  my  examples  thus : 

Catabapiisis,  We  reply  first  that  Zwingli  says  in  his  book  that 
an  act  of  the  apostles  can  prove  nothing,  which  is  not  true. 
Second,  grant  that  it  is  true ;  the  obscure  testimony  which  he 
alleges  concerning  the  act  of  Paul,  i  Cor.  i.  i6,  and  concerning 
Lydia,  can  therefore  by  his  own  admission  prove  nothing. 

Reply :  I  myself  recognize  my  own  words,  and  I  will  not  per- 
mit them  to  be  twisted  by  your  violent  appropriation  of  them 
otherwise  than  as  they  were  said.  It  was  in  this  sense  that  I 
said  that  the  act  of  the  apostles  proved  nothing.  Everywhere 
we  read  that  they  baptized ;  by  that  fact  we  cannot  prove  that 
they  did  not  baptize  those  whom  Scripture  does  not  assert  to 
have  been  baptized  by  them.  For  otherwise  it  would  follow  that 
the  divine  virgin  mother  was  not  baptized^^for  Scripture  does  not 
relate  her  baptism.  I  would  say :  By  a  fact  a  not-fact  cannot 
be  proved.  We  read  that  Christ  was'  at  Jerusalem,  Capernaum 
and  Nazareth ;  it  does  not  follow  that  he  was  not  at  Hebron 
because  Scripture  does  not  say  so.  We  read  that  Christ  taught 
at  Nazareth,  therefore  he  did  not  teach  at  Bethlehem,  for  we  do 
not  read  that  he  taught  there.  Again,  who  does  not  see  that 
the  acts  of  the  apostles  are  most  pertinent  as  a  defence  of  our 
acts,  provided  we  do  them  in  the  same  way  under  the  same  law? 
Peter  thought  nothing  external  should  be  placed  on  the  necks  of 
the  disciples ;  James  allowed  that  something  should  be  imposed, 
principally  because  of  the  Jews  who  had  believed.  It  therefore 
follows  rightly,  if  it  can  be  obtained,  that  all  ceremonies  be 
abrogated  entirely ;  if  this  can  not  be  done  with  public  peace, 
those  can  be  tolerated  on  account  of  the  weak  which  do  not 
involve  impiety.     For  while  the  apostles  permitted  certain  small 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  I4I 

details,  such  as  abstinence  from  blood  and  things  strangled,  they 
in  no  way  permitted  believers  to  be  circumcised.  For  he  who  is 
circumcised  becomes  a  debtor  to  the  whole  law ;  not  so  he  who 
eats  not  blood  or  things  strangled.  It  does  not  follow :  The 
apostles  are  not  said  to  have  eaten  pork,  therefore  they  did  not 
eat  it.  So  our  reasoning  here  is :  It  cannot  be  proved  that 
believers'  infants  were  not  baptized  by  the  apostles  because  this 
is  not  written,  for  there  are  many  things  done,  both  by  Christ 
and  by  the  apostles,  which  were  not  committed  to  writing.  The 
lawyers  call  this  a  question  of  law,  not  of  fact.  Something  may 
exist  in  law  that  never  issues  in  fact.  It  was  lawful  for  Paul  to 
draw  bodily  nourishment  from  the  field  where  he  sowed  spiritual 
seed.  For  Christ  had  said  that  the  laborers  were  worthy  of  their 
hire.  Now  as  he  did  not  use  this  lawful  right,  the  reasoning 
does  not  follow  :  Paul  did  not  receive  remuneration  for  preach- 
ing, therefore  no  one  should  accept  it.  Where  again,  not  to  pass 
over  this,  your  audacity  ought  to  be  considered.  For  when 
you  cry  out  among  the  simple  populace  against  the  ministers  of 
the  gospel  that  they  ought  not  to  gain  a  living  from  the  gospel : 
Paul  with  his  hands  provided  support  for  himself  and  for  others, 
in  this,  as  in  all  other  matters,  you  act  with  malicious  unfairness. 
For  he  himself  (Paul),  I  say,  taught  that  it  was  right  for  those  to 
receive  support  who  in  turn  nourished  by  the  word.  The  condi- 
tion of  affairs  at  that  time  admonished  him,  so  that  he  did  not 
do  what  was  permissible,  as  the  impious  and  the  false  apostles 
were  assailing  him.  Read  i  Cor.  ix.  and  you  will  learn  how 
much  Paul  discussed  on  this  matter  of  fact  and  right.  You  will 
see  that  it  is  not  only  foolish,  but  impious  to  argue  thus :  This  is 
done,  it  is  therefore  done  under  warrant;  this  is  not  done,  there- 
fore it  is  not  right  to  do  it.  I  would  say  then  by  this  expression 
nothing  else  than  this :  The  acts  of  the  apostles  cannot  prove 
anything  more  than  that  the  apostles  did  not  baptize  infants— 
to  grant  for  the  time  that  they  did  not — but  it  does  not  follow 
that  they  are  not  to  be  baptized,  or  that  a  negative  follows  from 


142  ZWINGLI    SELECllONS. 

the  affirmative,  as  the  apostles  baptized  adults  and  believers^ 
therefore  infants  are  not  to  be  baptized.  You  may  argue  neither 
in  divine  nor  in  secular  matters  from  the  fact  to  the  right;  then 
only  may  a  fact  be  adduced  for  the  law  when  an  act  has  been 
proved  done  by  the  law.  For  example,  at  Zurich  it  was  per- 
mitted b/  the  goodness  of  God  to  aboHsh  all  externals  without 
compromising  public  peace.  Since  this  was  done  legally  it  is 
not  lawful  to  do  away  with  all  at  Winterthur  and  Stein  if  only 
love  as  a  judge  permits  it  as  right.  At  Jerusalem  things  strangled 
and  blood  were  interdicted  because  of  the  weak.  Now  at  Bern 
and  Basel  certain  things  which  are  not  most  wicked  can  be  borne 
to  a  certain  extent  if  love  warns  that  this  is  right;  impious  things, 
such  as  the  mass,  idols,  false  doctrine,  are  not  to  be  suffered. 
Therefore  the  acts  of  the  apostles  are  to  be  a  law  to  us  so  far  as 
they  were  done  under  sanction  of  the  law.  So  it  is  only  things 
false  and  wicked  that  right  forbids  both  them  and  us  to  do,  apart 
from  whether  they  themselves  have  ever  done  them.  For  when 
you  have  done  that  which  was  permissible  you  have  done  right, 
even  though  no  apostle  had  done  it.  My  words  therefore  must 
be  understood  as  deahng  with  right  and  with  fact.  To  wit, 
infants  may  not  be  denied  baptism  because  it  is  nowhere  ex- 
pressly said  that  the  apostles  baptized  infants.  Also  there  is  the 
consideration  that,  as  we  shall  show  clearly,  the  fact  that  they 
baptized  may  not  have  been  put  down  in  writing,  and  the  acts 
of  none  may  prejudice  the  right,  much  less  acts  not  committed. 
So  that  if  it  were  down  in  plain  words  somewhere :  The  apostles 
did  not  baptize  infants,  it  would  not  (even  then)  follow  that  they 
are  not  to  be  baptized.  The  inquiry  would  have  to  be  made 
whether  they  simply  omitted  the  performance  or  whether  it  was 
not  right  to  baptize.  This  we  prove  by  John  iv.,  where  you  read  : 
Although  Jesus  himself  did  not  baptize.  Here  you  have  an 
example  of  fact  or  non-fact.  Christ  did  not  baptize ;  must  we 
therefore,  according  to  you,  not  baptize?  This  would  follow  if 
you  are  to  argue  from  a  fact  to  a  law.     And  you  can  not  say : 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 43 

But  it  says  in  the  same  place  that  the  apostles  baptized.  For  we 
^  should  at  once  reply :  Oh,  if  the  apostles  rightly  baptized,  even 
though  Christ  himself  did  not,  we,  too,  rightly  baptize  infants, 
though  the  apostles  did  not.  There  is  no  difference  in  the 
cases,  or  rather  our  case  is  the  stronger;  we  have  Christ's  not 
baptizing,  yet  the  legitimacy  of  baptism ;  you  have  the  apostles 
only,  who  did  not  baptize  infants  (supposing  we  grant  that  they 
did  not),  yet  none  the  less,  infants  are  to  be  baptized.  For 
since  baptism  is  legitimate,  though  Christ  did  not  baptize,  so  is 
baptism  of  infants,  though  the  apostles  did  not  baptize  them, 
unless  it  is  forbidden  by  another  necessity  which  prevents  the 
baptism  of  infants.  As  to  your  reply  in  the  second  place  to  the 
examples  and  facts  which  I  adduced,  as  follows  :  Grant  that  it  is 
true  (/.  e.y  that  nothing  can  be  proved  by  the  deeds  of  the 
apostles  unless  it  is  clear  that  they  acted  legitimately),  the 
obscure  testimony  which  he  adduces  concerning  Paul's  act  cannot 
therefore  even  in  his  own  opinion  prove  anything.  In  this  you 
have  a  fine  answer ;  you  turn  the  tables  upon  me  beautifully. 
For  if  by  acts  one  cannot  prove  legitimacy,  but  one  must  examine 
what  is  legitimate,  then  that  Paul  baptized  infants  in  the  families 
of  Stephanas,  Lydia  and  the  jailor,  cannot  prove  infant  baptism. 
For  I  was  not  here  intending  by  these  examples  to  confirm  as 
upon  a  foundation  the  baptism  of  infants,  but  showing  how  rash 
and  false  was  your  argument  when  you  said  thai  the  apostles 
never  baptized  [infants],  for  you  have  no  testimony  to  this;  and 
then  to  prove  that  it  was  more  likely  than  not  that  they  baptized, 
I  laid  as  the  foundation  the  saying  :  The  children  of  believers  are 
as  much  within  the  church  and  as  much  among  the  sons  of  God 
as  are  their  parents. 

Catabaptists.  Third.  Just  before  this  fundamental  argument 
of  Zwingli's  Paul  says :  Some  of  the  family  of  Chloe  tell  me  that 
there  are  strifes  and  contentions  among  you,  etc.  [i  Cor.  i.  ii.] 
As  here  infants  announced  and  could  announce  nothing  (for  they 
could  know  nothing),  so  the  infants  of  Stephanas'  family  were  not 


144  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

baptized,  if  indeed  there  were  infants  in  that  family.  For  Zwingli 
thrusts  them  into  it,  in  spite  of  the  testimony  of  Scripture?* 

Reply.  Who  does  not  see  that  the  church  never  had  such  im- 
postors? They  dare  to  reason  as  follows  :  No  infant  of  the  family 
of  Chloe  could  make  announcements  to  Paul,  therefore  no  infant 
of  Stephanas'  family  was  baptized.  What  is  there  here  but 
imposture  for  those  who  are  ignorant  of  argument?  Who  was 
ever  so  unskillfully  malign  or  so  malignly  unskillful  as  to  argue 
thus?  It  can  only  be  that  they  rely  upon  the  foolishness  of 
men.  As  if  I  should  argue :  No  infant  announced  to  Christ 
about  the  tower  that  fell,  or  about  those  whose  blood  Pilate 
mingled  with  the  sacrifices,  therefore  Christ  embraced  no  infant. 
Or :  It  is  written  of  a  certain  family  that  it  announced  certain 
tidings,  so  who  could  not  announce  could  not  be  of  that  family. 
As  if  announcement  or  any  other  deed  made  one  of  a  family. 
What  insanity  is  this? 

Catabaptists.  Fourth.  All  testimony  that  mentions  families 
excludes  children.     This  is  self-evident. 

Reply.  Therefore  when  Christ  was  a  boy  he  was  not  of  the 
house  and  family  of  David.  Then  why  is  the  family  of  his  foster- 
parent  Joseph  so  diligently  written  down?  So  when  peace 
was  given  to  the  family  of  Zaccheus,  if  there  were  infants 
in  it,  were  they  excluded  from  peace  ?  Ex.  i.  2 1  :  Moses  asserts 
that  the  Lord  had  built  a  house  for  the  children  of  Israel,  i.  e., 
given  them  family  and  posterity,  when  the  midwives  pretended 
that  the  Hebrew  women  had  skill  in  helping  on  progeny.  So 
those  children  were  not  children,  or  the  women  bore  adults  and 
men  ;  for  infants,  according  to  you,  are  not  of  the  family.  Ex. 
xii.  30.  There  was  not  a  house  in  which  there  was  not  one  dead, 
therefore  no  infant  was  dead.  But  why  do  I  plead  with  the  aid 
of  testimony,  as  if  there  were  need  to  tear  away  with  testimony 
of  truth  things  said  most  foolishly?     But  that  is  fine  which  they 

*  That  is,  Zwingli  claims  that  there  were  infants  in  the  family  although  there 
is  no  plain  scripture  proof  of  it. 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTISr  TRICKS.  1 45 

add  :  This  is  self-evident.  As  if  any  ass  ever  gaped  so  at  a  lyre 
as  to  believe  him  who  asserted  that  boys  did  not  belong  to  the 
house  or  family. 

Catabaptists.  Fifth.  According  to  the  reason,  opinion  and 
sentiment  of  man  no  one  ought  to  baptize  or  do  anything  else, 
but  according  to  express  Scripture  or  fact,  as  the  mass  of  testi- 
mony of  divine  Scripture  proves.  Just  as  Zwingli  himself  has 
often  exclaimed  against  the  vicar  *  and  other  enemies  of  God, 
and  will  not  admit  anything  which  depends  upon  human  judg- 
ment or  the  custom  of  the  fathers.  But  now  he  hastens  to  do 
what  the  enemies  of  truth  have  thus  far  done. 

Reply.  I  am  always  of  the  opinion  you  ascribe  to  me,  and 
have  never  held  or  will  hold  a  different  one  while  life  lasts.  But 
when  you  impute  to  me  what  the  enemies  of  truth  have  done 
until  now,  you  speak  from  that  spirit  which  has  from  the  beginning 
been  false  and  has  not  been  based  on  truth.  For  what  else  have 
I  ever  done  but  confirm  by  testimony  of  Scripture  all  that  I  have 
given  out?  Not  by  authority,  though  I  have  some  modicum  of 
this ;  not  with  clamor  or  hypocrisy.  This  will  appear  to  my 
readers  in  the  progress  of  the  discussion. 

Catabaptists,  Paul  teaches  that  what  is  not  in  the  gospel  or 
jntiie  discourses  of_the  apostles  is  anathema. 

Reply,  Where,  pray,  does  Paul  teach  this?  I  suppose  you 
refer  to  what  he  wrote  in  Gal.  i.  8  :  But  though  we  or  an  angel 
from  heaven  preach  to  you  otherwise  than  we  preached  let  him 
be  anathema.  I  will  expose  your  words  here  a  little  diligently, 
for  your  ignorance  and  your  malice  will  both  be  manifest.  Your 
ignorance  because  you  suppose  that  when  Paul  wrote  this  the 
gospel  records  and  apostolic  letters  were  already  in  the  hands  of 
the  apostles  and  authoritative.  As  if  even  then  Paul  attributed 
to  his  own  letters  (for  they  are  not  the  least  part  of  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament)  that  whatever  was  in  them  was  sacrosanct. 

*  Faber,  vicar  general  of  Constance.     See  note  on  p.  46. 


146  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

Not  that  I  would  not  have  his  productions  sacrosanct,  but  that  I 
would  not  have  monstrous  arrogance  imputed  to  the  apostles. 
As  often  as  they,  either  Christ  or  the  apostles,  refer  to  Scripture 
they  mean  not  their  own  letters  or  the  gospel  records,  which 
were  either  not  yet  written  or  were  then  in  process  of  writing,  just 
as  the  times  demanded  ;  they  meant  the  law  or  the  prophets. 
You  cannot  escape  by  saying  that  you  do  not  refer  to  the  gospels 
or  the  discourse  of  the  apostles  in  writing,  for  you  say  :  Whatever 
is  not  contained  [therein].  You  use  the  word  "contained." 
And  this  must  refer  to  documents  [monumenta].  Here  is 
stretched  forth  the  finger  of  your  malice  and  inconstancy.  You 
have  finally  come  to  the  point  of  denying  the  whole  Old  Testa- 
ment, just  as  also  at  Worms  Denk  and  Haetzer  with  Kautz 
deny  in  no  obscure  terms  a  full  satisfaction  through  Christ,  which 
is  nothing  else  than  trampling  upon  the  New  Testament ;  with 
us  at  Griiningen  they  deny  the  whole  Old  Testament,  as  I  havfe 
seen  with  my  own  eyes.*  For  they  have  written  to  our  senate  : 
The  Old  Testament  is  antiquated  and  the   testimony  adduced 

♦  These  persons  were  prominent  Baptists.  Hans  Denk,  born  at  Heybach 
(Habach),  Upper  Bavaria,  about  1495;  ^^^  educated  at  Ingolstadt;  and  in 
Augsburg  received  into  the  circle  of  the  Humanists  ( 1520);  in  Basel  was  proof 
reader  for  Cratander  and  Curio,  and  thence  in  the  autumn  of  1523,  on  CEco- 
lampadius'  recommendation,  went  to  Nuremberg  as  principal  of  a  classical 
school.  But  his  stay  was  short,  for  his  advocacy  of  the  views  of  Munzer  and 
Carlstadt  made  him  so  detested  by  the  local  clergy  that  he  was  driven  out  of 
the  city  on  January  31,  1524,  and  ever  after  was  a  wanderer.  He  is  found  in 
Muhlhausen,  St.  Gall  and  in  Augsburg  (September,  1525-October,  1526),  and 
there  he  met  Balthasar  Hubmaier,  and  there  he  was  baptized  and  baptized 
others.  He  was  now  recognized  as  a  leader  by  the  Baptists,  which  meant  that 
he  was  a  shining  mark  for  persecution.  He  went  to  Strassburg  and  made  a 
stir,  quite  captivated  many  people,  so  the  authorities  requested  him  to  leave, 
and  he  did,  on  December  26,  1526.  On  January  20,  1527,  he  is  found  in 
Landau  holding  a  disputation  upon  Infant  Baptism;  the  next  few  months  he 
passed  at  Worms,  and  there  in  connection  with  Haetzer,  another  Baptist 
scholar,  made  a  translation  of  the  Prophetical  Books,  which  is  still  esteemed 
(published  by  Peter  Schoffer  at  Worms,  April  13,  1527).  Again  the  zeal  of 
the  Baptists  in  defending  their  views  in  a  public  disputation  (June  13,  1527,) 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 47 

from  it  is  void,  and  so  can  prove  nothing.  Here  I  look  for  your 
spirit,  I  say,  if  you  assert  it  to  be  a  true  one.     For  it  at  the  same 

led  to  his  expulsion  from  the  city.  He  visited  his  brethren  in  South  Germany 
and  Switzerland,  everywhere  at  the  peril  of  his  life.  At  last,  wearied  in  body 
and  mind  from  incessant  wanderings  and  debatings,  he  came  to  Basel  in  the 
autumn  of  1527,  and  threw  himself  upon  the  gentle  and  generous  protection 
of  CEcolampadius,  who  cheerfully  received  him  and  conscientiously,  though 
vainly,  strove  to  convert  him.  But  soon  he  was  attacked  by  a  power  no  earthly 
protector  could  cope  with — he  fell  sick  of  the  plague  and  died  in  Basel, 
November,  1527.     He  was  a  pure,  honest  and  noble  man  and  fine  scholar. 

Ludwig  Haetzer  (or  perhaps  oftener  written  Hetzer,  i.  e.,  baiter,  as  being 
an  objectionable  form,  and  therefore  more  suitable  for  a  hated  "Anabaptist  ") 
was  born  at  Bischofszell,  near  St.  Gall,  Switzerland,  about  1500;  educated  at 
Freiburg  im  Breisgau,  and  became  proficient  in  Latin,  Greek  and  Hebrew. 
He  lived  in  the  circle  of  the  early  Swiss  Reformers,  and  showed  himself  a  bril- 
liant though  excitable  youth.  When  chaplain  at  Wadenschwyl,  on  the  south 
shore  of  the  Lake  of  Zurich,  and  fifteen  and  a  half  miles  from  the  city,  he 
pubhshed  a  widely  read  pamphlet  advocating  the  destruction  of  the  images  in 
the  churches,  the  consequence  of  which  was  that  on  September  29,  1523,  the 
crucifix  in  one  of  the  city  churches  was  destroyed.  In  the  Second  Zurich 
Disputation  (October  26-28,  1523,)  he  came  into  prominence,  and  drew  up 
the  official  report.  In  Zurich  he  remained  for  months  occupied  in  literary  work, 
but  there  he  joined  the  radicals,  who  eventually  became  the  first  Swiss  Baptist 
party.  In  the  end  of  June,  1 524,  he  went  to  Augsburg,  with  a  letter  of  recom- 
mendation from  Zwingli,  but  returned  at  the  end  of  the  year,  and  then  allying 
himself  with  the  Baptist  party  he  was  ordered  from  the  city,  January  21,  1525. 
He  went  again  to  Augsburg,  and  found  employment  with  the  printer  Ottmar. 
But  his  associations  with  the  dreaded  and  detested  Baptists  caused  his  banish- 
ment in  the  autumn.  By  way  of  Constance  and  Basel,  where  CEcolampadius 
received  him  as  he  had  Denk,  he  came  once  more  to  Zurich  and  won  at  length 
the  return  of  Zwingli's  confidence.  But  he  had  not  altered  his  opinions, 
although  out  of  prudence  he  concealed  them,  and  when  he  published  a  book 
revealing  his  Baptist  views  Zwingli  did  not  stay  his  banishment  from  Zurich. 
So  in  March,  1526,  he  was  back  in  Basel.  Then,  at  Strassburg  (whence  he 
was  banished  in  the  end  of  December,  1526),  and  later  in  Worms,  he  trans- 
lated the  prophetical  books  of  the  Old  Testament  from  the  Hebrew,  and  with 
Denk  issued  the  volume  as  already  mentioned.  The  two  were  expelled  (June, 
1527,)  and  Haetzer  went  again  to  Augsburg,  whence  he  had  to  go,  in  the 
spring  of  1528.  These  repeated  and  now  long-continued  experiences  of 
persecution  seem  to  have  broken  his  spirit.     He  went  to  his  native  village. 


148  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

time  takes  away  from  us  the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  the  New 
Testament,  for  at  Griiningen  you  tread  upon  the  Old  Testament 

thence  to  St.  Gall,  and  finally,  in  the  autumn  of  1528,  to  Constance.  There 
he  married  Anna,  the  widow  of  his  Augsburg  patron,  George  Kegel.  But  he 
was  charged  with  having  married  also  her  maid,  and  so  he  was  arrested  for  big- 
amy, and  on  February  4,  1529,  beheaded.  But  then  the  Baptists  were  popu- 
larly believed  to  be  capable  of  all  the  sins  and  crimes  in  the  calendar,  and  the 
probability  is  that  Haetzer  really  was  innocent  of  the  accusation  and  died  for 
his  faith.  Anyhow,  his  death  was  considered  by  many  as  that  of  a  martyr,  and 
was  surely  faced  with  religions  ecstacy  and  commemorated  by  the  Baptists. 

The  last  person  to  be  mentioned  in  this  connection  is  Jacob  Kautz,  called 
by  Zwingli  under  his  Latinized  name  Cucius.  He  was  bom  at  Bockenheim  in 
Prussia,  three  miles  northwest  of  Frankfort  on  the  Main,  about  1500.  He 
entered  the  priesthood,  but  a  little  later  accepted  the  Reformation  and  preached 
it  at  Worms.  He  took  his  coloring  rather  from  Zwingli  than  from  Luther, 
and  so  was  on  bad  terms  with  both  the  Roman  Catholic  and  Protestant  clergy 
in  the  city.  When  Denk  and  Haetzer  visited  Worms  in  1527  they  made  his 
acquaintance,  and  he  joined  the  Baptist  company  there,  which  had  become 
quite  numerous,  and  it  was  he  who  on  Whitsunday  (June  9th),  1527,  gave  out 
in  German  the  Seven  Articles  (printed  in  Zwingli's  Works,  viii.,  77,  both  in 
German  and  Latin,)  as  topics  for  a  public  debate  on  June  13th.  These  Arti- 
cles of  Kautz  were  as  follows : 

"  L  The  external  word  is  not  the  true,  living  or  eternally  abiding  Word  of 
God,  but  only  the  testimony  or  indication  of  the  inner  to  satisfy  the  demand 
for  external  things. 

*'  n.  Nothing  external,  whether  word,  sign,  sacrament  or  promise,  has  power 
to  assure,  console  or  make  certain  the  inner  man. 

*'  HL  The  baptism  of  infants  is  contrary  to  the  teaching  of  God  given  us 
through  Christ. 

'*  IV.  In  the  Lord's  Supper  neither  the  body  nor  the  blood  of  Christ  is  cor- 
poreally present. 

"V.  All  that  was  lost  in  the  first  Adam  is  and  will  be  found  more  richly 
restored  in  the  second  Adam,  Christ;  yea,  in  Christ  shall  all  men  be  quickened 
and  blessed  forever. 

"  VL  Jesus  Christ  of  Nazareth  suffered  on  the  cross  and  made  satisfaction  for 
us  in  no  other  way  than  that  we  should  stand  in  his  footsteps  and  walk  in  the 
way  which  he  has  opened,  and  obey  the  command  of  the  Father,  even  as  the 
Son  did.  They  who  speak,  think  or  believe  otherwise  of  Christ,  each  in  his 
own  way  makes  out  of  Christ  an  idol. 

' '  VII.  Just  as  the  literal  bite  of  the  forbidden  fruit  would  have  harmed  neither 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  149 

just  as  much  as  at  Worms  upon  the  New.  If  you  admit  it  not 
to  be  true,  what  boldness  is  it  to  simulate  the  divine  Spirit  with 

[Adam]  himself  nor  his  descendants  if  he  had  not  eaten  of  the  same  with  his 
mind,  so  also  the  bodily  suffering  of  Jesus  Christ  is  not  real  satisfaction  and 
reconciliation  with  the  Father  without  internal  obedience  and  the  greatest 
desire  to  yield  to  the  eternal  will. 

"Of  these  articles  thus  formulated,  no  one  must  be  judge  except  only  He  who 
speaks  and  testifies  in  the  hearts  of  all  men,  as  Scripture  says.  For  no  man 
has  been  commanded  by  God  to  call  the  truth  into  judgment,  but  only  to  testify." 

It  must  be  confessed  that  some  of  these  Articles  were  repugnant  to  the  pre- 
vaiHng  orthodoxy,  but  in  a  less  strenuous  time  they  could  have  been  debated 
without  persecuting  those  who  held  them. 

There  were  at  that  time  close  connections  between  the  Reformed  in  Worms 
and  in  Strassburg,  and  many  of  the  Baptists  in  the  former  place  had  come  from 
the  latter.  Accordingly  the  Strassburg  Reformed  pastors  issued,  on  July  2,  1527, 
a  pamphlet  entitled:  "A  faithful  warning  of  the  preachers  of  the  gospel  in 
Strassburg  against  the  Articles  which  Jacob  Kautz,  preacher  at  Worms,  has 
lately  issued  concerning  the  fruit  of  the  Scripture  and  the  Word  of  God,  Infant 
Baptism  and  the  redemption  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  other  doctrines." 

There  is  no  evidence  that  the  purposed  debate  ever  came  off,  but  the  city 
banished  Kautz,  along  with  Denk  and  Haetzer,  and  henceforth  he  was  a  wan- 
derer. He  went  first  to  Augsburg,  then  to  Rothenburg  and  in  the  beginning 
of  1528,  to  Strassburg.  There  he  had  a  debate  with  Capito  and  Butzer,  June, 
1528,  and  remained  at  Hberty  till  January,  1529,  when  he  was  cast  into  prison 
for  street  preaching.  He  was  released  only  to  be  banished.  He  is  heard  of 
only  twice  again.  In  1532,  he  applied  in  vain  for  permission  to  return  to 
Strassburg;  in  1536,  he  was  teaching  school  in  Moravia.  The  date  and  place 
of  his  death  are  unknown. 

The  allusion  to  a  Baptist  denial  of  the  whole  Old  Testament  at  Worms  is  to 
that  by  the  company  of  Baptists  already  mentioned  as  gathered  in  that  place. 
Griiningen,  which  is  also  mentioned  in  that  connection,  is  a  village  in  the  Can- 
ton of  Zurich,  and  twelve  miles  southeast  of  that  city  and  some  three  miles 
back  of  the  north  shore  of  the  lake.  It  was  an  early  Baptist  important  center 
and,  therefore,  a  scene  of  ruthless  persecution. 

Capito  in  his  letter  to  Zwingli  of  June  9,  1527  (see  latter's  Works,  viii,  76- 
78)  reveals  the  attitude  of  the  Strassburg  Reformed  clergy  towards  the  Baptists, 
to  whom  he  had  for  a  while  inclined.  He  charges  them  with  fantastic  belief 
and  fanatic  conduct.  It  is  very  likely  there  were  mystics  and  fanatics  among 
them,  but  testimony  from  violently  prejudiced  quarters  should  be  received  with 
caution,  for  from  all  that  appears,  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Baptists  were  good 
and  God-fearing  people. 


150  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

such  persistency  and  wantonness  !  But  in  vain  do  I  offer  you 
this  alternative,  for  you  will  never  admit  your  spirit  to  be  a  lying 
one.  I  will  arraign  it  then  by  the  very  power  of  him  who  silences 
the  kind  of  spirit  in  which  you  abound,  so  that  it  does  no  more 
dare  to  assert :  Thou  art  the  Son  of  God.  For  as  falsely  and 
faithlessly  as  you  did  they  say :  Thou  art  the  son  of  God.  For 
as  often  as  you  confess  Christ  (by  "  you  "  I  mean  your  leaders) 
you  make  a  confession  worse  than  the  demons.  For  pain  con- 
strained them,  for  they  so  experienced  his  power  and  might  that 
sincerely  they  confessed  that  he  is  the  Son  of  God.  But  if  you 
ever  confess  him  you  do  it  with  pretence,  for  as  soon  as  you 
hope  for  such  an  increase  of  your  forces  that  you  may  speak  dis- 
dainfully of  him  without  being  called  to  account,  suddenly  you 
assail  his  kingdom  and  goodness.  For  does  he  who  denies  that 
Christ  has  thoroughly  made  satisfaction  for  the  sins  of  the  world 
by  one  offering  of  himself — does  he  say  aught  but :  Christ  is 
false,  he  is  not  God,  he  is  not  our  souls'  salvation?  Of  this 
enough  has  been  said  above,  I  think.  But  it  is  time  to 
prove  your  spirit.  You  openly  teach  that  felicity  can  come 
to  none  but  by  works  of  righteousness.  So  Christ,  whom  the 
Father  sent  into  the  world  to  become  a  victim  for  the  de- 
spairing, is  made  void.  Of  this  victim  you  have  no  need, 
for  you  trust  in  your  righteousness  But  do  you  truly  trust? 
By  no  means.  For  not  only  does  divine  Scripture  teach  that  all 
men  are  liars  and  that  all  things  are  under  sin  through  the  law ; 
even  the  human  reason  of  wise  men  reaches  the  same  conclusion, 
so  that  it  sees  that  man  thinks  and  does  nothing  except  by  his 
favor.  I  have  adduced  the  testimony  of  Cicero  in  my  Com- 
mentary for  this  purpose — it  would  take  too  long  to  repeat  this 
here.*  So  the  oracle  attributed  to  Apollo,  "  Know  thyself," 
makes  clear  to  us  that  man  within  and  at  heart  is  worthless  and 
evil.     For  man  is  not  told  to  inspect  himself  that  he  may  con- 

*  Allusion  to  his  Conwieniary  on  the  True  and  False  Religion,  see  Works, 
iii.,  171. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  151 

template  himself  with  pleasure,  but  that  he  may  descend  into 
^himself  and  weigh  both  himself  and  his  [works].  He  will  find 
such  corruption  that  he  will  not  rashly  think  highly  of  himself 
whom  he  finds  so  low,  or  have  a  low  estimate  of  another  than 
whom  he  sees  himself  no  better.  Since  then  even  human  reason 
perceives,  when  it  is  quite  frank  and  thrusts  itself  into  the  hidden 
recesses,  that  man  is  altogether  evil,  with  what  boldness  do  you 
assert  trust  in  human  innocence?  Or  will  you  perhaps  say  that 
we  must  not  trust  at  all?  According  to  your  opinion  then  we 
shall  all  be  adjudged  to  ultimate  condemnation.  For  if  felicity 
must  come  by  our  innocence,  and  this  innocence  is  wholly  denied 
us,  then  felicity  for  us  has  perished.  Then  why  do  you  simulate 
innocence?  Why  do  many  of  you  take  to  themselves  these  words 
of  Christ  and  boast :  Which  of  you  convicteth  me  of  sin  ?  I 
therefore  judge  that  this  is  the  result,  whether  you  assert  that 
innocence  is  man's  and  from  this  innocence  (which  the  apostle 
calls  righteousness)  felicity  [flows],  or  whether  you  deny  it,  your 
hypocrisy  is  made  clear.  For  if  you  insist  that  felicity  follows 
from  our  deeds,  reason  and  common  sense  oppose.  What  have 
you  to  do  with  sacred  Scripture,  which  you  so  hold  as  a  supple- 
ment or  appendage  that  you  lay  it  aside  whenever  you  please? 
If  you  deny  that  it  [innocence?]  can  be  obtained,  why  then  do 
you  pretend  that  what  you  see  can  pertain  to  no  mortal,  that 
you  hold  with  both  hands?  Read  again  and  again  this  refutation, 
I  beg,  and  you  will  come  to  know  yourselves,  unless  you  are  more 
obstinate  than  the  demon.  What  then?  At  Worms  you  deny 
Christ,  and  lead  the  way  back  to  trust  in  works,  because  the  men 
there  who  have  recently  become  interested  in  rehgion  are  little 
trained  in  the  wiles  of  hypocrisy,  and  so  are  susceptible  to  your 
tricks.  For  when  they  see  your  squalor  and  hear  also  your 
sounding  words  about  innocence  they  assert  that  you  have  assumed 
this  squalor  that  you  might  the  more  put  on  God ;  they  therefore 
receive  you  as  men  of  God,  and  supply  richly  what  they  possess. 
For  what  chest  is  so  firm  that  it  will  not  yield  to  such  sanctity, 


152  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

what  pouch  so  close  as  not  to  open  to  so  vehement  a  spirit? 
Worshippers  of  the  belly !  At  Griiningen  you  deny  the  Old 
Testament,  for  you  see  there  many  who  are  not  affected  by  a 
pretence  of  sanctity,  and  detest  the  boldness  with  which  you  talk 
about  "  spirit ''  when  Scripture  does  not  suffice.  Since  therefore 
you  see  that  catabaptism,  from  which  you  hope  as  from  a  fountain 
to  derive  all  your  counsel,  is  proved  by  no  Scripture ;  while  infant 
baptism  can  be  defended  by  the  Old  Testament,  you  reject  the 
Old  Testament.  Since  then  you  disparage  part  of  the  Old  and 
part  of  the  New,  you  only  show  that  you  are  the  very  worst  and 
most  fickle  of  men,  indeed  atheists.  For  while  you  draw  from 
the  records  which  are  written  about  Christ  the  matters  that  con- 
cern baptism,  you  make  Christ  himself  of  no  account.  So  it  is 
known  to  all  that  you  do  everything  for  contention's  sake,  however 
much  in  hypocrisy  you  simulate  sanctity  and  simplicity.  Further, 
since  you  reject  the  Old  Testament  for  the  reason  that  you  cannot 
endure  what  is  deduced  from  it  in  reference  to  infant  baptism, 
you  clearly  evince  that  you  make  of  no  account  him  who  is  God 
both  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  New.  Let  me  not  seem  too 
immoderate,  dear  reader.  You  will  see  that  in  all  matters  the 
case  of  these  people  is  worse  than  my  pen  can  show.  What 
hidden  ulcer  is  that  they  cherish — but  why  do  I  say  hidden  ulcer, 
when  it  is  not  hidden  that  they  deny  both  the  Old  Testament 
and  Christ  himself?  Weigh  a  Httle  carefully  their  words,  which 
we  copy  here.  Paul,  they  say,  teaches  that  whatever  is  not  in 
the  gospel  or  discourses  of  the  apostles  is  anathema.  You  see 
how  openly  they  reject  the  Old  Testament.  You  see  them  as 
wishing  to  appear  to  strive  by  Scripture,  yet  distorting  Scripture 
as  they  do  here  by  Paul,  even  making  that  Scripture  lie  which 
Christ  called  in  as  testimony.  And  have  the  apostles  taught 
anything  that  they  had  not  drunk  in  or  proved  from  this  Scrip- 
ture? A  fine  and  learned  saying  that :  "  Whatever  is  not  in  the 
gospel  or  in  the  discourses  of  the  apostles,  let  it  be  anathema." 
The  oracles  of  the  prophets  or  of  the  poets  [/.  e.,  poetical  books 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 53 

of  the  Old  Testament,]  are  not  contained  to  the  word  in  the 
^gospel  and  apostolic  commentaries,  so  they  are  anathema.  Thus 
ought  they  to  speak  who  make  themselves  masters  of  all.  Who, 
pray,  thus  speaks?  Do  not  all  who  base  their  speech  on  this 
axiom  speak  thus  :  Whatever  is  asserted  without  the  testimony  of 
the  Old  and  New  Testament,  let  it  be  anathema?  But  now  I  will 
restrain  my  chiding,  for  I  think  that  you,  most  devout  reader, 
see  clearly  this  hidden  ulcer. 

Catabaptists.  John  xvii.  20  gives  a  good  reason  through  the 
mouth  of  Christ  as  he  says :  Neither  pray  I  for  these  (/.  <?.,  the 
apostles,)  alone,  but  for  them  also  which  shall  believe  on  me 
through  their  word.  The  apostles  have  their  word  from  Christ, 
but  Christ  has  [his]  from  the  Father. 

Reply.    Unite  these  words,  reader,  to  those  immediately  pre- 
ceding, that  you  may  see  how  trained  a  sense  they  have  in  citing 
Scripture  and  how  excellently  they  square  what  they  thus  caw 
out  before  an  unskilled  people.     What  will  they  of  the  authority 
of  Christ?     Is  it  that  he  is  to  be  beheved  because  what  he  has. 
said  and  taught  he  has  drawn  from  the  Father  and  his  disciples- 
from  him?    Then  why  do  they  not  believe  Christ,  who  just  before 
said  :   For  their  sakes  I  sanctify  myself,  that  they  also  might  be 
sanctified   through  the  truth,  /.  <?.,  really  and   truly  sanctified?' 
By  which  words  he  means  only  what  Paul  does  when  he  saySy, 
Heb.  X.  14  :    For  by   one   ofifering  he   hath  perfected  for   ever 
them  that  are  sanctified.     Why  do  they  not  believe  him  when 
he  says  :  God  hath  not  sent  his  Son  into  the  world  to  judge  the 
world,  but  that  the  world  might  be  saved  through  him.     He  who 
beheveth  in  him  is  not  judged,  etc.     And  :   No  one  cometh  to 
the  Father  but  by  me.     Why  do  they  not  believe  his  apostles? 
Peter,  e.  g,,  saying  :  Ye  yourselves  are  built  up  as  living  stones 
into  a  spiritual  house,  a  holy  priesthood,  offering  spiritual  sacri- 
fices   acceptable    to    God     through    Jesus    Christ.     And    Paul : 
Through  him  we  have  access  to  God.     And  :  He  is  our  redemp- 
tion.    In  fact  whither  does  the  whole  teaching  of  Paul  tend  if 
II 


154  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

not  to  show  that  through  Christ  alone  sins  are  done  away  and 
salvation  is  given.  Why  do  they  not  believe  John?  Little 
children,  he  says,  I  have  written  these  things  to  you  that  ye  sin 
not.  But  if  any  man  among  you  sin,  we  have  an  advocate  with 
the  Father,  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous.  He  is  the  propitiation, 
not  for  our  sins  only,  but  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world.  These 
people  then  have  not  the  purpose  of  proving  that  faith  is  to  be 
had  in  Christ's  words  and  his  apostles',  for  they  have  none  them- 
selves ;  if  they  had  they  would  not  assert  justification  by  works. 

Catabaptists.  Sixth.  By  the  same  rule  by  which  Zwingli  thrusts 
infants  into  the  family  I  thrust  them  out,  but  by  Scripture;  this 
Zwingli  does  without  Scripture,  for  infants  cannot  be  counted 
among  the  baptized  families. 

Reply.  First,  I  ask  by  what  rule  do  you  think  I  thrust  children 
into  families.  By  none.  Do  you  not  see  then  that  men  are 
born  of  men,  that  parents  support  and  protect  children?  You 
see  how  those  angel  messengers  of  the  devil  have  put  off  all 
human  sense.  Their  head  in  hell  knows  that  a  demon  is  not 
born  of  a  demon.  So  having  become  his  slaves  they  suppose  that 
this  has  become  obsolete  among  men  viz.,  that  man  should  beget 
man  and  foster  what  he  has  begotten.  Hear  therefore  what  I 
mean,  and  how  I  would  say :  It  is  more  likely  than  otherwise 
that  the  apostles  baptized  infants.  For  in  the  sacred  Scriptures 
we  have  whole  families  baptized  by  them,  in  which  it  is  more 
than  likely  that  there  were  children.  So  to  you  this  does  not 
seem  the  more  hkely?  Show  the  reason,  and  teach  us  how  it  is 
more  hkely  that  there  were  no  children  in  those  households,  of 
which  we  mentioned  three.  But  I  will  throw  them  out  by 
Scripture,  he  says.  But  who,  pray,  are  you  that  throw  them  out? 
I  throw  them  out,  he  says.  He  must  be  a  man  of  great  authority 
among  you  to  promise  that,  yet  he  shows  none,  neither  baton  nor 
scourge.  For  however  he  promises,  he  furnishes  no  evidence  by 
which  he  may  demand  that  he  be  believed.  .  .  Himself  said  it, 
forsooth  !     Children,   he  savs,   cannot  be  reckoned  among  the 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 55 

families  baptized.  Here  is  Scripture  for  you  !  That  master  of 
ours  thinks  they  cannot  be  reckoned  in ;  who  will  dare  to  con- 
tradict him?  Zwingli,  he  says,  thrusts  children  into  the  family 
without  Scripture.  What  then  if  upon  you,  you  raging  wild  ass 
(for  I  would  not  call  him  a  man  who  I  think  was  baptized  among 
the  shades  on  the  Phlegethon,*  both  because  it  seems  funny  to 
strive  with  ghosts  and  because  I  am  not  sure,  even  though  I  am  led 
by  certain  assured  conjectures  to  conclude  who  is  the  author  of  so 
learned  a  confutation  f) — upon  you  I  should  bring  down  loads  of 
proof  from  Scripture,  from  which  you  may  learn  that  children  are 
to  be  reckoned  in  baptized  families.  In  Acts  ii.  44  we  read : 
And  all  that  believed  were  together,  and  had  all  things  common. 
Here  I  ask :  Did  the  behevers  have  their  children  with  them  or 
not?  If  they  did,  were  they  not  in  their  famihes?  If  not,  how 
is  it  we  nowhere  read  that  they  were  anxious  because  he  who 
believed  could  not  have  his  children  with  him?  Was  the  spirit 
that  impelled  them  so  cruel  as  to  dictate  the  abandonment  of 
their  children  ?  Oh  !  You  do  not  mean  that  they  did  not  have 
them  and  nourish  them,  but  that  these  did  not  belong  to  the 
Christian  family  !  I  ask  then  what  you  mean  by  family?  You 
will  doubtless  say :  Those  who  had  come  to  such  an  age  that 
they  knew  what  law  is  and  what  sin  is,  for  he  must  repent  who 
wishes  to  be  baptized,  but  since  infants  cannot  repent,  they 
cannot  be  included  in  the  family.  Thanks  to  God  that  you  have 
learned  to  make  so  fine  a  rope  of  sand,  twisting  out  lie  from  lie. 

*  Phlegethon  was  one  of  the  five  rivers  of  Hades. 

t  The  document  is  generally  attributed  to  Conrad  Grebel,  who  had  been 
converted  by  Zwingli  from  a  licentious  life,  and  who  became  one  of  his  ardent 
followers.  He  joined  the  radical  party  in  Zurich,  and  when  Zwingli  would 
not  go  their  lengths  he  turned  against  him,  and  in  letters  to  Vadian,  his 
brother-in-law,  abuses  him.  See  Die  Vadianische  Briefsammlung,  ed.  Arbenz, 
passim.  Grebel  belonged  to  a  prominent  Zurich  family.  His  father  was  be- 
headed as  a  traitor  (November,  1526),  and  he  himself  was  banished  from  the 
city  for  his  Baptist  faith  in  1525,  and  died  of  the  plague  the  next  year  at 
Maienfeld,  in  the  canton  of  St.  Gall  and  a  couple  of  miles  north  of  Ragatz. 


156  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

For  having  persisted  in  the  statement  that  none  is  to  be  baptized 
but  he  who  can  repent,  you  will  rightly  assert  that  infants  may 
not  be  baptized.  But  here  there  is  need  of  a  law  forbidding, 
and  you  have  no  law.  You  therefore  are  the  law,  and  where  the 
lion  fails  you,  patch  on  the  fox.  And  why  not?  What  one  of 
your  brethren  weighs  how  correctly  or  incorrectly  you  reason? 
But  we,  who  are  accustomed  to  assert  nothing  not  abundantly 
founded  and  supported  by  divine  testimony,  we  know  that  Isaac, 
even  when  an  infant,  belonged  to  Abraham's  family  so  completely 
that  he  compelled  his  father  to  send  forth  the  servant  and  the 
child  born  of  her.  Does  not  this  seem  so  to  you?  But  Paul 
joins  Moses  in  saying  :  The  son  of  a  maid-servant  shall  not  be  heir 
with  my  son  Isaac.  He  was  heir,  and  doubtless  of  the  family. 
For  even  they  who  are  not  heirs,  such  as  slaves  and  freedmen, 
are  of  the  family.  I  do  not  care  to  plead  here  that  by  lawyers 
this  son  whom  you  disinherit  here  is  declared  a  member  of  the 
family.  I  hasten  to  this :  Ex.  xii.  48  we  read — we  who  go  to 
the  Old  and  the  New  Testament  as  to  two  lights  to  prevent  us 
from  being  deceived,  while  in  the  meantime  you  support  your- 
selves on  your  own  spirit — as  pearls  do  on  their  own  absorption 
when  nothing  flows  into  or  moistens  them  from  outside — we  read, 
I  say :  And  when  a  stranger  shall  sojourn  with  thee  and  keep 
the  passover  of  the  Lord,  let  all  his  males  first  be  circumcised, 
and  then  he  shall  rightly  keep  it.  Why  is  said  here :  All  his 
males?  Does  this  pertain  only  to  adults?  Why  then  the  precept 
to  circumcise  every  male  on  the  eighth  day?  Yet  infants  are  not 
of  the  family.  To  me  the  opposite  seems  true,  for  they  possess 
heirship.  But  it  is  yours  to  prove  by  Scripture  that  they  who 
received  the  sign  of  the  church  of  God  in  accordance  with  the 
rite  and  religion  of  the  parents  belonged  not  to  their  parents' 
family.  But  that  you  will  as  soon  do  this  as  cut  through  an 
isthmus  I  will  show  by  other  evidence.  In  Acts  xxi.  5  Luke 
writes :  And  after  some  days  we  went  on  our  way,  all  bringing 
with  us  wives  and  children,  etc.     Were  the  children  here  only 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  157 

adults?  And  if  not  adults,  were  they  not  of  the  family?  What 
miracle  is  here,  or  what  is  the  special  attention,  if  the  fathers  of 
the  family  brought  the  apostle  on  his  way  with  wives  and  youths 
or  almost  adults?  This  was  the  special  attention,  that  fathers 
with  their  wives  carried  or  dragged  with  them  the  children,  as  is 
customary  during  such  eager  times.  Now  they  took  with  them  not 
others,  but  their  own  sons ;  these  were  therefore  in  the  family. 
There  is  no  reason  to  admonish  you,  good  reader,  that  I  am 
exposing  some  trick  or  guile.  For  what  difficulty  will  there  be 
in  discovering  this  to  be  malice,  in  that  they  do  not  reckon  the 
infants  of  believers  with  the  father's  family.  For  it  cannot  be 
fooHshness,  since  they  themselves  are  counted  in  the  families  of 
the  Denks  and  Hetzers  and  Kautzs  (wonderful  flock)  to  their 
finger-nails. 

Catabaptists.  Seventh.  Grant  that  there  were  infants  in  these 
families,  the  truth  yet  does  not  favor  that  those  infants  were 
baptized.     But  it  follows  with  insult  to  truth  and  divine  wisdom. 

Reply,  Who  can  wonder  enough  at  the  assurance  of  the  man? 
He  grants  that  children  were  in  those  famihes,  but  says  they 
were  not  baptized.  Yet  in  the  first  passage  the  words  are  :  But 
I  baptized  also  the  house  of  Stephanas.  In  the  second  :  But 
when  she  was  baptized  and  her  house.  In  the  third  :  And  he 
was  baptized  and  all  his  house.  How  could  he  say  in  general, 
in  the  first  place,  that  he  had  baptized  the  house  of  Stephanas, 
which  he  did  not  do  if  there  were  children  in  it  whom  he  had 
not  admitted?  The  same  must  be  said  about  the  second.  But 
in  the  third  case,  when  he  asserts  that  the  whole  house  was 
baptized,  how  is  it  that  they  do  not  see  that  in  the  beginnings 
the  same  custom  obtained  as  with  Abraham  and  his  descendants, 
who  circumcised  the  whole  class  of  his  servants,  as  well  those 
taken  in  war  as  the  home-born  slaves  and  those  bought,  not  to 
say  the  children,  as  appears  from  the  passage  just  cited  from 
Exodus?  There  it  is  expressly  commanded  to  circumcise  every 
male  of  the  family,  and  there  is  never  any  mention  of  believing 


158  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

or  knowing  God,  which  yet  ought  to  be  the  especial  care  of  all 
It  follows,  he  says,  with  insult  to  the  truth  and  wisdom  of  God. 
Though  they  know  neither,  they  affirm  insult  to  both.  But  what 
contumely  is  it  to  either  God's  truth  or  his  wisdom  that  Hebrew 
infants  were  circumcised  and.  included  in  the  faithful  families? 
But  these  words  of  theirs  are  high-sounding ;  this  is  their  mer- 
chandise— bombast  and  words  a  foot  and  a  half  long.  To  words 
of  this  sort,  which  they  use  in  great  rotundity,  the  unskilled  mob 
erects  its  ears  and  then  applauds. 

Caiabaptists.  Eighth.  The  last  chapter  of  this  epistle  shows 
that  the  apostle  neither  knew  nor  baptized  children.  Zwingli 
dishonestly  keeps  this  back;  it  makes  against  his  foundation  of 
glass.  Paul  describes  this  family  to  the  learned  when  he  says : 
Ye  know  the  house  of  Stephanas,  that  it  is  the  first-fruits  in 
Achaia,  and  that  they  have  addicted  themselves  to  the  service  of 
the  saints — that  ye  submit  yourselves  to  them  and  to  every  one 
that  helpeth  with  us  and  laboreth.  A  family  of  this  sort  paedo- 
baptism  and  paedobaptists  do  not  recognize ;  they  do  away  with 
it,  for  it  is  against  them. 

Reply.  As  in  many  other  places  so  here,  we  easily  catch  the 
author  of  this  frivolous  confutation,  although  the  greatest  proof 
is  the  Swiss  tongue,  in  which  it  is  so  written  that  it  has  no  foreign 
or  imported  words.  Yet,  as  I  have  said,  since  the  man  now 
doubtless  burns  among  the  shades  as  much  as  he  froze  here 
through  his  catabaptist  washings,  I  have  concluded  to  omit  his 
name.*  What  impudence  is  this,  O  shade,  in  that  you  assert 
that  I  wish  to  ignore  these  words  of  Paul.     Were  these  words 

*The  editors  of  Zwingli's  Works  think  that  here,  as  on  p.  155  and  elsewhere, 
is  an  allusion  to  Balthasar  Hubmaier  because,  as  they  say,  CEcolampadius  an- 
nounced to  ZwingU  on  July  19,  1527,  that  there  was  a  rumor  that  Hubmaier 
had  been  burnt  at  the  stake.  The  rumor  was  false  and  the  editors  made  a  slip, 
as  this  treatise  of  Zwingli's  is  dated  July  31,  1527,  and  the  letter  of  Qicolam- 
padius  is  really  dated  August  18,  1527,  (  Works,  viii.,  85.)  But  the  allusion 
probably  is  to  Conrad  Grebel,  as  already  stated  on  p.  155.  To  burn  among 
the  shades  it  was  not  absolutely  necessary  to  have  been  burnt  at  the  stake  first. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST.  TRICKS.  159" 

not  cited  by  Haetzer  in  the  first  two  debates?  Did  not  I 
reply  that  they  were  synecdochic,  like  i  Cor.  x.  i  :  All  our 
fathers  were  under  the  cloud?  But  there  were  infants  also 
under  the  cloud,  yet  no  individual  mention  is  made  of  them.  All 
crossed  the  sea.  Yet  the  infants  could  not  have  crossed. 
Therefore  they  crossed  who  did  not,  but  were  borne  by  those 
who  did.  So  in  the  family  of  Stephanas  there  were  those  who 
were  the  first  believers  of  the  Achaians ;  there  were  also  those 
who  at  the  same  time  belonged  to  the  church,  who  in  actuality, 
because  of  age,  not  yet  believed  or  took  part  in  the  ministry  of 
the  saints.  All  were  baptized  unto  Moses.  He  speaks  through- 
out of  the  fathers,  the  ancestors  and  forefathers,  by  which  we 
understand  that  they  who  were  then-  infants  Paul  now  calls 
fathers,  for  out  of  these  was  the  people  of  Israel.  Therefore  not 
only  adults,  but  infants  also,  were  baptized  unto  Moses.  For  if 
they  who  were  infants  at  the  crossing  of  the  Red  Sea  were  not 
baptized,  the  apostle  did  not  speak  correctly  in  saying :  All  were 
baptized  unto  Moses,  for  they  were,  as  I  have  just  said,  the 
fathers  of  their  posterity.  Whither  do  you  turn  now?  Not  to 
pass  this  by :  Infants  are  written  of  by  the  apostle  as  then 
baptized.  But  you  say  it  is  a  figure.  Very  good.  It  was  a 
figure  like  this  :  As  those  infants  then  belonged  to  the  family  of 
their  earthly  and  their  heavenly  Father  and  were  sealed  by  their 
sacraments,  so  now  also  they  who  are  children  of  Christians,  since 
they  are  also  sons  of  God,  use  the  sacrament  of  God's  sons.  You 
will  find  no  crack  by  which  you  can  escape.  For  you  argue 
foolishly  to  the  negative  from  facts  and  examples,  or  rather  from 
neither  fact  nor  example.  For  what  do  you  but  say :  The 
apostles  are  not  said  to  have  baptized  infants,  therefore  infants 
are  not  to  be  baptized?  Does  not  your  whole  strength  turn  on 
this  one  hinge?  But  we  cannot  so  strive,  but  only  by  facts,  if 
only  one  has  to  stand  and  judge  by  examples,  as  follows :  The 
Hebrew  children  were  all  baptized  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea, 
just  as  are  ours.     Paul,  in  the  passage  cited,  tends  in  no  other 


l6o  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

direction  than  to  prove  that  they  are  as  much  initiated  by  our 
sacraments  as  we  ourselves.  It  follows  therefore,  first,  that  in 
Paul's  time  it  was  the  custom  of  the  apostles  to  baptize  infants ; 
second,  if  any  one  contradicts  it  he  vitiates  the  opinion  of  Paul. 
What  does  this  man  here  than  the  like?  He  says  we  are  not 
superior  to  them,  and  they  are  not  inferior  to  us.  He  attributes 
to  them  then  the  same  sacraments  as  we  have,  and  to  us  the 
same  as  they  had,  as  in  Col.  ii.  ii.  Those  ancients  could  not 
all  be  baptized  exactly  as  we  are  unless  we  were  all  baptized  with 
our  families.  All  these  therefore  being  baptized  and  made  equal 
with  us,  it  is  clear  that  as  all  their  infants  were  baptized  in  the 
sea  unto  Moses,  so  also  in  the  time  of  the  apostle  believers'  chil- 
dren were  baptized  unto  Christ. 

Now  I  return  to  the  point,  and  assert  that  the  children  are 
spoken  of  by  synecdoche  in  :  All  crossed  the  sea.  For  to  be 
accurate  crossing  occurred  only  to  those  who  were  of  an  age  and 
strength  to  cross,  and  that  all  ate  the  same  spiiitual  food  when 
those  alone  ate  who  were  spiritual,  yet  none  the  less  it  is  said  of 
all  that  they  ate.  So  also  in  this  place,  if  Paul  had  used  the 
word  "  all  "  and  had  said  :  All  of  Stephanas'  family  have  given 
themselves  to  the  ministry  of  the  saints,  yet  by  the  very  force  of 
synecdoche  the  infants  also  would  be  understood  to  be  of  the 
family,  and  [likewise]  that  they  who  then  had  believed  had 
given  themselves  to  the  Lord.  For  this  is  the  nature  of  synec- 
doche, that  when  as  to  any  body  that  has  different  parts,  and 
those  parts  are  similar  in  some  respects  and  different  in  others, 
anything  is  predicated  of  the  whole  body,  it  is  understood  of  a 
part,  and  what  is  said  of  a  part  is  understood  of  the  whole. 
Here  is  an  example  of  what  I  mean.  All  Judea  went  forth  to 
him.  You  see  that  "All  Judea  "  is  put  for  those  who  went  out, 
and  the  synecdoche  is  two-fold.  One  puts  the  container  for  the 
content  and  the  other  the  whole  for  a  part :  the  Judean  region 
for  the  inhabitants,  all  the  inhabitants  for  a  good  part  of  them. 
On  the  other  hand  see  Is.  iii.  i6  :  Because  the  daughters  of  Zion 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  l6l 

are  haughty.  Here  the  daughters  of  Zion  are  a  part  of  the 
whole,  yet  they  are  put  for  the  whole  people,  especially  for  the 
princes  who  erected  haughty  crests  wickedly  against  the  Lord. 
Ex.  xvi.  2  :  All  the  congregation  murmured  against  Moses.  But 
how  did  the  children  murmur?  They  were  ignorant  of  what  was 
done.  But  if  they  did  not  murmur  the  whole  congregation  did 
not  murmur,  for  the  children  were  also  of  the  congregation. 
You  see  what  sort  of  critics  you  are,  laboring  in  logomachy  and 
desperately  ignorant  of  what  you  most  trust  in.  For  you  cling  to 
the  letter  alone,  and  are  ignorant  of  what  is  of  prime  importance 
in  expounding  the  letter.  Tell  me,  pray,  to  whom  was  it  said : 
Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy  God  in  vain,  and 
thou  shalt  not  steal,  and  the  like?  Was  it  not  to  the  ancients 
who  were  the  people  and  church  of  God?  But  those  things 
cannot  be  said  to  infants ;  are  these  then  not  to  be  of  the  church 
and  people  of  God?  God  forbid  !  The  children  were  members 
of  the  people  of  God,  the  fathers  indeed  of  the  people.  Gen. 
XXV.  23.  It  is  clear  therefore  that  what  is  said  with  reference  to 
some  body  or  whole  when  there  is  a  part  of  that  whole  to  which 
what  is  said  does  not  relate,  ihat  part  none  the  less  belongs  to 
that  body,  even  though  what  is  said  does  not  fit  it.  Again,  if 
anything  is  said  of  a  part  of  this  body  or  whole  which  yet  does 
not  belong  to  that  part  at  all,  yet  it  so  relates  to  the  whole  body 
that  it  touches  and  admonishes  those  parts  that  are  subject  to 
what  is  said,  as  is  clear  at  once  from  the  examples  cited. 
"  Thou  shalt  not  steal  "  is  not  said  to  the  infants,  but  to  those 
who  are  under  its  responsibihty.  Again,  the  threat  that  Isaiah 
makes  against  the  daughters  of  Zion  pertains  to  all  who  oppressed 
men  by  their  violence  and  haughtiness.  So  also  I  replied,  though 
not  in  so  many  words,  to  that  passage  that  Haetzer  adduced  from 
Paul,  by  which  he  would  exclude  the  children  from  the  family  of 
Stephanas.  Yet  that  family  appears  to  have  been  pretty  large, 
if  we  worthily  weigh  the  generously  ample  words  in  which  Paul 
treats  of  them.     Ghildren  remain  therefore  till  now  in  behevers' 


1 62  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

families  and  are  baptized,  and  when  mention  is  made  of  those 
famines,  or  they  are  written  or  spoken  of,  whatever  is  said  or  told 
pertains  to  that  part  to  which  it  is  applicable.  I  might  adduce 
nmnberless  examples,  for  the  Hebrews  use  almost  no  figure  more 
extensively,  but  I  think  a  taste  has  been  given  by  which  you  will 
easily  tell  all  the  rest.  "  Israel  my  inheritance."  To  whom  was 
this  said,  if  not  to  the  Israelitic  posterity?  But  children  can 
not  receive  this.  It  does  not  follow  therefore  they  did  not 
belong  to  the  inheritance  or  the  peculiar  people.  But  although 
there  is  a  part  that  cannot  understand  what  is  said,  that  part 
none  the  less  belongs  to  the  whole  body.  '  So  when  Christ  said  : 
Go  ye,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them,  etc.,  the  apostles  taught 
all  who  were  accessible  to  the  doctrine,  and  they  baptized  all 
who  were  fitted  for  the  sacrament  of  baptism. 

Catabaptists.  Paul,  a  man  of  truth,  wished  in  this  first  chapter 
[of  First  Corinthians]  to  show  that  he  had  baptized  but  few  at 
Corinth,  but  Zwingli  and  his  witnesses  make  Paul  a  liar,  and  say 
that  he  baptized  many  when  they  assert  that  he  baptized  infants 
in  the  house  of  Stephanas. 

Reply.  Because  we  say  that  doubtless  there  were  children  in 
the  families  does  it  follow?  Therefore  they  make  Paul  a  liar, 
who  asserts  that  he  baptized  but  few.  As  if,  though  infants  were 
baptized,  they  who  were  baptized  by  him  could  not  be  numbered 
still  as  a  few  !  What,  pray,  can  you  do  with  such  a  stupid  kind 
of  men?  What  kind  of  a  church  do  you  think  that  which — I 
will  not  say  believes,  but — listens  to  a  man  asserting  such  things? 

Catabaptists.  Tenth.  How  the  reaHty  is,  this  text  shows  which 
says  :  Let  no  one  say  he  was  baptized  in  my  name  and  thence  be 
puffed  up  on  my  account.  If  infants  then  should  speak  and  be 
factious  (as  those  Zwinglians  would  have  it)  they  were  rightly 
baptized. 

Reply.  See  how  fine  they  are  at  a  syllogism  !  Let  no  one  say, 
says  he,  infants  can  not  speak  nor  be  factious,  therefore  they 
were  not  baptized.     As  if  none  could  be  factious  but  those  who 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 63 

said  they  were  of  Apollos,  Cephas  or  Paul !  Then,  as  if  we  had 
not  just  shown  that  by  synecdoche  that  is  to  be  understood  of 
any  part  which  is  suitable  to  it. 

Catabapiists.  Eleventh.  It  is  not  true  that  Paul  baptized 
Corinthian  children. 

Reply.     Gently,  I  beg  of  you. 

Catabapiists.  Why?  Because  he  baptized  believers  alone  or 
saw  that  they  were  baptized  by  others. 

Reply.  Now  you  argue  finely,  for  it  follows  at  once  :  Believers 
only  were  baptized,  therefore  children  could  not  have  been 
baptized — provided  you  can  establish  that  exclusion,  that  be- 
lievers only  were  baptized  by  the  apostles. 

Catabapiists.  As  we  shall  establish  it  from  Acts  xviii.  aud  xix., 
to  the  confusion  and  disproof  of  the  misleading  psedobaptist 
contention. 

Reply.     The  mountain  is  laboring. 

Catabapiists.  It  is  thus  in  the'  Acts,  xviii.  8.  When  Paul  was 
at  Corinth,  Crispus,  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  beheved  in  the 
Lord  with  his  whole  house,  and  many  Corinthians  who  heard  at 
the  same  time  (I  translate  faithfully  and  hterally,  perverting 
nothing,  however  those  fellows  struggle  and  stammer  even  in  the 
German  tongue)  believed  and  were  baptized.  Infants  could  not 
hear,  they  could  not  then  believe,  much  less  be  baptized.  For 
the  hearing  faithful  were  baptized.  And  here  the  whole  house 
was  rendered  faithful,  from  which  infants  are  excluded,  and  they 
were  so  excluded  because  there  were  none  there,  or  if  there  were 
they  were  not  counted  in  it  and  accordingly  not  baptized,  for  the 
faithful  families  were  baptized. 

Reply.  Infants  could  not  listen  [to  the  word],  but  it  does 
not  follow  that  consequently  they  were  not  baptized.  We  have 
nowhere  the  prohibition  not  to  baptize  infants  of  believers  unless 
they  hear  and  believe.  I  require  a  prohibition  forbidding.  But 
you  add  beautifully :  And  here  the  whole  house  was  rendered 
faithful.     I  grant  it.     You  continue  :  From   which  infants  were 


164  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

excluded.  This  I  ask  you  to  prove  from  sacred  Scripture.  I 
hear  it  said  :  Infants  are  excluded,  but  nowhere  by  a  divine 
oracle.  Here  the  whole  dispute  hinges.  There  was  a  strife 
among  the  apostles  whether  the  gospel  should  be  preached  also 
to  the  Gentiles  or  not.  This  strife  rested  partly  upon  a  false 
inference,  partly  upon  probability.  The  fallacy  was  this  *  To  us 
the  Christ  was  promised,  therefore  not  to  the  Gentiles.  But  who 
is  so  unskilled  as  not  to  see  that  it  does  not  at  all  follow :  The 
Messiah  was  promised  to  us  Jews,  therefore  not  to  the  Gentiles. 
For  it  may  be  that  he  was  promised  also  to  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
Scriptures  testify  to  this  in  various  ways.  So  in  the  present 
passage  :  The  writings  of  the  apostles  testify  that  they  who  heard 
and  believed  were  baptized,  but  it  does  not  at  all  follow  that 
children  were  consequently  not  baptized  by  them.  For  it  may 
at  the  same  time  be  true  that  the  apostles  baptized  believers, 
and  the  apostles  baptized  children.  Just  as  it  is  true :  The 
Hebrews  circumcised  adults,  they  also  circumcised  infants.  For 
when  adult,  nay,  decrepit,  Abraham  inflicted  upon  himself  the 
wound  of  circumcision  and  upon  the  infants  Ishmael  and  Isaac. 
You  are  mistaken  therefore,  O  Catabaptists,  when  you  make  an 
indefinite  proposition  exclusive.  An  exclusive  is  either,  no  one 
ought  to  be  baptized  except  he  who  first  believes,  or  infants 
ought  not  to  be  baptized.  But  from  :  The  apostles  baptized 
believers,  and  from  :  The  apostles  are  not  said  to  have  baptized 
believers,  it  does  not  follow.  For  "  The  apostles  baptized 
believers,"  and  "  No  one  may  be  baptized  unless  he  first  believes  " 
are  not  equivalent.  So  also  with  :  "  The  apostles  are  not  said  to 
have  baptized  infants,  therefore  these  were  not  baptized  by  them 
and  may  not  be  by  us."  For  it  may  be  that  they  baptized  both 
believers  and  infants,  and  also  either  that  they  baptized  infants, 
but  the  fact  was  not  recorded,  or  that  they  did  not  baptize  them, 
and  still  these  were  baptized  by  the  ministers  of  the  churches  or 
may  be  rightly  baptized.  For  [the  apostles]  were  sent  above  all 
to  preach,  not  to  baptize.     If  you  impute  sophistry  to  me  here, 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 65 

as  the  boldness  of  the  calumniator  suggests,  recognize  that  the 
following  is  your  syllogism,  or  rather  paralogism  :  The  apostles 
are  not  said  to  have  baptized  infants,  therefore  they  did  not,  and 
these  are  not  to  be  baptized.  So  that  we  are  compelled  to  turn 
your  weapons  against  yourselves.  This  is  probably  what  led  the 
apostles  to  think  that  the  gospel  was  not  to  be  preached  to  the 
Gentiles.  In  the  first  mission  this  interdict  was  given :  Go  ye 
not  into  the  way  of  the  Gentiles,  from  which  it  was  possible  for 
them  to  assert  most  strongly  that  it  was  intended  by  Christ  that 
he  should  keep  himself  for  the  Hebrews  alone.  If  you  had  had 
such  a  deliverance,  ye  gods,  with  what  impudence  would  you 
have  rushed  upon  us  !  Consider  therefore  these  two  commands  : 
Go  ye  and  teach  all  the  Gentiles,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  etc.,  and :  Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach,  etc. 
Here  we  have  the  abrogation  and  annulment  of  the  interdict : 
Go  not  into  the  way  of  the  Gentiles.  For  they  had  before  taught 
and  baptized.  They  who  thus  far  then  had  been  shut  up  to  the 
enclosure  of  Judea  found  opened  to  them  the  whole  world. 
Thus,  I  will  say  in  passing,  you  find  these  latter  passages  opposed 
like  an  antithesis  to  and  abrogating :  **  Go  not  into  the  way  of 
the  Gentiles."  You  have  not  therefore  yet  proved  the  negative  : 
"  No  one  may  be  baptized  but  the  believer." 

Catabaptists.  So  also  Acts  xvi.  31  has:  Believe  in  the  Lord 
Jesus  and  thou  shalt  be  saved  and  thy  house.  And  that  his 
house  was  saved  with  him  follows  on  :  And  they  spake  unto  him 
the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  to  all  that  were  in  his  house.  Then 
further :  And  he  was  baptized,  and  all  his,  straightway.  He 
heard  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  so  he  was  baptized,  and  all  who 
were  in  his  house ;  they,  too,  heard  and  so  were  baptized. 
Where  again  infants  are  excluded,  for  they  could  not  hear  and 
beheve,  as  follows  on :  And  he  rejoiced  with  his  whole  house, 
because  he  had  believed  in  God. 

Reply.  To  pass  over  some  things  translated  into  the  Swiss 
tongue  not  with  entire  fidelity,  I  briefly  say :  This  whole  knot 


1 66  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

may  be  cut  by  the  one  axe  of  synecdoche.  For  if  there  were 
infants  in  that  family,  what  is  said  about  faith  and  doctrine  we 
apply  to  those  who  could  receive  and  believe,  but  what  is  said  of 
baptism,  to  those  who  belonged  to  the  family  of  the  believing 
master,  but  through  age  or  weakness  neither  heard  nor  believed. 
For  when  God  said  :  Hear,  O  Israel,  the  Lord  thy  God  is  one 
God,  he  spoke  to  all  who  were  of  Israel.  But  because  the  infants 
neither  hear  nor  understand  he  does  not  exclude  them  so  that 
they  are  not  of  the  congregation  of  the  people  of  God  or  should 
not  be  circumcised  with  all  who  hear  and  believe. 

Catabnptists.  Twelfth.  PhiHp  preached  to  the  whole  city  of 
Samaria,  where  doubtless  there  were  infants.  Yet  Luke  speaks 
in  these  insuperable  words :  And  they  were  baptized,  men  and 
women.  Men  and  women,  says  Luke.  But  if  some  sciolist 
should  say,  as  a  certain  Wittenberg  sophist  lately  did  :  Under 
the  word  women  girls  are  also  included,  and  under  "  men  "  males, 
this  is  fiction.  For  preceding  these  words  we  find :  Philip 
preached,  they  believed.  They,  the  men  and  women,  I  say, 
believed  and  were  baptized.  So  here  falls  synecdoche,  Zwingli's 
other  basis.  This  synecdoche  is  a  comprehensive  mode  of 
speech  to  the  effect  that  where  Scripture  speaks  of  believers 
baptized,  infants,  too,  are  included  among  them,  as  he  strives  to 
prove  by  perverting  the  Sciipture  passages  that  do  not  contain 
this. 

Reply.  I  pass  over,  O  shade,  what  that  Wittenbergian  did  with 
you  while  you  were  in  the  flesh.  But  this  is  sure,  that  this  pass- 
age does  not  exclude  infants,  even  though  it  does  not  mention 
them.  For  that  does  not  exclude  which  does  not  exphcitly 
mention ;  for  to  pass  over  is  one  thing,  to  exclude,  another.  That 
may  be  omitted  which  is  in  no  way  excluded.  The  excluded 
can  never  come  into  the  account.  Since  then  the  omitted,  as 
well  as  those  expressly  mentioned,  are  included  by  synecdoche 
(as  has  been  sufficiently  shown),  we  are  still  waiting  for  you  to 
prove  that  exclusion  of  yours  by  which  you  assert  infants  are 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 6  J 

excluded.  For  we  have  proved  that  by  comprehension  (/.  e., 
synecdoche,  unless  the  Latin  word  is  less  appropriate  than  the 
Greek,)  they  are  included.  In  that  you  promise  to  show  how  I 
had  asserted  synecdoche  only  by  twisting  Scripture,  again  you 
are  rich  in  promising,  but  poor  in  fulfilment.  For  when  you 
would  tear  away  synecdoche,  you  establish  it  most  firmly. 

Catabaptists.  As  in  Acts  ii.  44 :  All  who  believed  were 
together  and  had  all  things  common.  Here,  says  Zwingli,  if 
behevers  alone  were  there,  whither  had  they  removed  the  infants? 
If  they  had  cast  them  off,  they  would  have  been  fine  believers  to 
disown  the  children  against  the  command  of  the  Lord.  So  the 
children  of  believers  were  also  numbered  with  behevers  and  were 
baptized  with  them.  To  which  we  reply:  ZwingH  speaks  rightly 
when  he  says  that  they  would  not  have  been  believers  if  they  had 
cast  off  the  children.  For  how  could  it  be  that  these  who  had 
all  things  in  common  did  not  have  the  children  common  nor 
educate  them  in  common,  according  to  the  precept  of  the  Lord? 
Infants  then  are  not  numerated  or  reckoned  among  the  believers, 
but  are  included  in  thia^  that  the  believers  had  all  things  common. 

Reply.  You  see,  good  reader,  whither  the  lie  turns  itself. 
They  would  rather  enumerate  believers'  children  with  their 
animals  and  baggage  than  with  the  parents,  lest  they  be  com- 
pelled by  synecdoche  to  include  them  with  believers.  For  they 
will  not  include  them  with  :  All  who  believed  were  there,  but 
with  :  And  they  had  all  things  common.  Among  them  therefore 
children  are  not  like  dear  pledges,  are  not  our  flesh  and  blood. 
For  what  else  will  they  when  they  deny  that  they  are  included 
among  the  believers,  and  put  them  in  what  all  have  common? 
What  tiger,  pray,  is  so  cruel?  Surely  to  this  pitch  of  insanity 
ought  they  to  come  who  have  put  off  not  only  the  sense  of  piety, 
but  also  all  human  sensibihty.  Here  I  beseech  you,  pious  heart, 
not  to  take  offence  at  what  I  am  about  to  say.  For  here  it 
must  be  put  down  (not  that  I  yield  so  much  to  passion,  but  that 
those  things  ought  not  to  be  ignored  by  all  which  those  people 


1 68  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

secretly  perpetrate,  like  what  Alexander  the  coppersmith  did  to 
the  divine  Paul),  so  that  we  may  the  more  easily  guard  ourselves 
from  this  pestilence.  In  describing  their  deeds  I  shall  be  free 
and  brief.  They  have  their  wives  common  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  desert  their  own  marriage  partners  and  take  others ;  so  with 
the  children,  as  to  desert  them  and  leave  them  for  others  to  sup- 
port. These  fine  fellows,  when  lust  persuades,  make  common  a 
brother's  wife,  even  his  virgin  daughter.  Though  the  very  force 
of  nature  requires  that  they  cherish  their  children  by  the  sweat 
of  the  body,  they  make  them  common  to  others. 

We  have  a  man  named  Figella  (Hafnef  ?),  who  lives  about  a 
mile  from  the  city.  He  most  contumaciously  protected  their 
teaching,  and  had  got  together  for  his  house  provision  wherewith 
to  spend  the  winter,  and  as  often  as  meal-time  came  around  the 
idle  flies  were  present,  prophesying  finely  about  God,  for  they 
think  their  babblings  worthy  the  name  of  prophecy.  The  father, 
wife  and  children  were  held  fast  by  these  wonders  until  the  pro- 
visions were  exhausted.  The  man  then,  least  expecting  what 
would  happen,  hoped  to  provide  other  food  with  the  aid  and 
assistance  of  his  table  companions ;  he  warned  them  that  it  was 
time  to  get  to  work  providing  nourishment.  He  talked  to  the 
deaf,  for  when  he  was  compelled  to  lay  the  warp  and  set  the  woof 
(for  he  was  a  weaver),  and  looked  for  their  help  in  some  part, 
they  began  to  praise  God  that  his  providence  prepared  and  prom- 
ised all  things  for  them  as  it  were  unsown  and  untilled,  and  laid 
hand  to  no  work.  Meanwhile  he  learned  from  his  wife  that  they 
had  attempted  adultery  with  her  under  the  pretext  of  piety,  and 
[when]  he  saw  that  they  were  bellies,  and  not  the  angels  he  had 
a  little  before  supposed  them,  he  drove  the  scoundrels  from  his 
house,  recovered  his  eyes  and  returned  to  the  Church  of  Christ. 
Here  you  see  how  public  they  would  have  things.  The  lost 
fellows  would  have  the  goods  of  ordinary  men  common,  but  their 
own,  if  they  have  any,  in  no  wise.  If  they  have  none  they  make 
all  common  in  this  way  :   they  distribute  the  labor  to  others ;  they 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 69 

enjoy  leisure  so  as  to  do  nothing,  then  they  eat  in  common.  So 
with  wives,  not  to  do  away  with  the  Republic  of  Plato,*  they  make 
common  not  their  own,  but  others.  This  is  proved  by  the  fol- 
lowing :  One  of  their  leaders  lived  in  a  village  about  five  miles 
out  of  the  city,t  a  man  of  considerable  wealth.  His  wife  came  to 
him  in  haste  when  he  was  going  away  that  he  might  leave  some- 
thing for  the  children.  She  asked  blood  from  a  stone.  Mean- 
while the  wife  remained  for  the  night,  perhaps  hoping  that  her 
blandishments  would  win  something  from  him,  and  when  the 
hour  arrived  she  sought  the  couch  of  her  husband,  and  the  spirit- 
ual man  replied  to  her :  Did  I  not  tell  you  that  you  came  only  for 
lust?  He  then  cast  her  off,  and  called  to  him  a  Catabaptist  girl. 
When  the  wife,  foreboding  evil,  opposed  this,  he  devoted  her  to 
evil.  "  You  are  carnal,"  he  said,  ''  and  so  you  think  and  suspect 
carnal  things.  You  will  be  damned  eternally."  Since  her  sus- 
picion was  in  no  way  shaken  by  the  maledictions,  she  came  to  us 
and  told  us  what  her  husband,  elsewise  so  impatient  of  lust, 
imposed  upon  them  to  believe — /.  e.^  about  spiritual  marriage. 
For  there  was  room  for  the  suspicion,  since  he  had  gone  with  the 
same  girl  on  several  occasions  to  St.  Gall,  and  alone  with  her  had 
passed  not  only  through  groves  and  shady  places,  but  had  occu- 
pied her  couch  during  the  night.  Now  finally  he  disclosed  the 
mystery — there  was  a  spiritual  marriage  between  them — to  which 
statement  the  wife  gave  no  credence.  So  this  fellow  would  have 
left  his  wife  common  to  others  that  he  might  leave  something 
common  (he  never  touched  her  afterwards),  unless  she  had  kept 
her  marriage  vows  with  better  faith  than  he,  and  took  a  common 
girl,  or  rather,  made  her  common. 

I  will  give  also  another  example.  There  were  elsewhere  also 
those  who  contracted  spiritual  marriages  after  a  similar  fashion; 
by  silver  rings  they  purchased  of  jewelers  they  bound  girls  and 
women  spirits  to  them.    There  were  such  in  the  school  of  Valentine, 

*  Allusion  to  the  teaching  in  Plato's  Republic,  Book  v. 
'    +This  village  probably  was  ZoUicon,  which  was  five  miles  out. 
12 


lyo  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

as  Irenaeus  testifies  in  his  first  book.*  At  St.  Gall  public  charges 
were  made  against  two  girls  who  had  been  of  unblamed  modesty 
until  they  had  gone  over  to  the  Catabaptists,  but  whose  modesty 
had  suffered  shipwreck  when  their  bodies  were  immersed  in  cata- 
baptism.  They  affirmed  that  they  were  betrothed  in  spiritual 
marriage,  the  rings  being  accepted,  and  in  one  night  on  one 
couch  two  Catabaptists  had  so  loosed  their  virgin  belts  that  the 
couch,  groaning  for  a  long  time,  at  length,  impatient  of  the 
burden,  threw  on  the  floor  with  one  crash  the  two  marriages. 
Those  who  heard  the  downfall  swore  solemnly  that  those  spirits 
made  such  a  sound  that  it  appeared  as  if  four  bodies  had  fallen 
from  on  high.  I  beg  you,  reader,  not  to  go  away  before  consid- 
ering that  the  force  of  hypocrisy  surpasses  even  the  attack  of  lust. 
By  which  they  may  be  the  less  self-complacent  who,  even  if  they 
were  chaste  (which  I  do  not  myself  beheve),  yet  were  such  in 
order  to  lay  up  for  themselves  this  glory  among  mortals.  For 
those  very  girls  had  before  been  tempted  to  the  crime,  but  in 
vain.  Hypocrisy  is  therefore  more  potent  than  the  flesh,  for 
under  the  pretext  of  the  Spirit  and  by  deceit  it  has  carried  the 
tower  of  virginity.  Why  should  I  speak  of  the  open  adulteries, 
which,  although  many,  are  few  in  comparison  with  those  con- 
cealed by  their  skill?  But  who  can  fittingly  tell  of  the  awful 
murder  which  a  brother  perpetrated  upon  his  own  brother  in  St. 
Gall?  t     What  ability  in  words  can  worthily  set  forth  so  great 

♦  Irenseus,  Adv.  Haer.,  I.,  vi.,  3.  The  passage  is  as  follows: 
*'  Some  of  them  are  in  the  habit  of  defiling  those  women  to  whom  they  have 
taught  the  above  doctrine,  as  has  frequently  been  confessed  by  those  women 
who  have  been  led  astray  by  certain  of  them,  on  returning  to  the  Church  of 
God,  and  acknowledging  this  along  with  the  rest  of  their  errors.  Others  of 
them,  too,  openly  and  without  a  blush,  having  become  passionately  attached 
to  certain  women,  seduce  them  away  from  their  husbands  and  contract  mar- 
riages of  their  own  with  them.  Others  of  them  again,  who  pretend  at  first  to 
live  in  all  modesty  with  them  as  sisters,  have  in  course  of  time  been  revealed 
in  their  true  colors,  when  the  sister  has  been  found  with  child  by  her  [pretended] 
brother."     (^Anie  Nicene  Fathers^  Chr.  Lit.  Co.,  ed.  i.,  324.) 

+  Thomas  Schinker  upon  his  brother  Leonhard. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  lyi 

atrocity?  Or  who  is  so  dull  as  not  to  see  that  God  has  set  forth 
this  example  for  the  good  of  all,  so  as  the  more  to  deter  from  this 
pernicious  sect?  A  brother  calls  in  a  brother  who  is  thinking  of 
no  such  thing  into  the  presence  of  his  father,  mother,  sisters  and 
the  whole  family,  and  orders  him  to  kneel  in  the  midst.  The 
fanatical  fellow  obeys,  thinking  his  brother  is  going  to  show  some 
wonder.  Doubtless  the  parents  had  the  same  expectation,  for 
almost  daily  among  them  something  new  is  born,  as  in  Africa. 
But  when  this  one  had  kneeled,  the  other  seized  a  sword  which 
he  had  brought  for  this  purpose,  drove  it  through  his  neck  and 
cut  off  his  head,  which  rolled  to  the  feet  of  his  parents,  and  left 
him  lifeless.  From  his  trunk  poured  a, great  quantity  of  blood. 
All  there  fell  and  became  [as]  lifeless  in  madness.  The  murderer 
himself  ejaculated  :  The  will  of  God  is  fulfilled.  Like  a  madman 
he  came  into  the  city  and  cried  out  to  the  Burgomaster :  I  an- 
nounce to  you  the  Day  of  the  Lord.  For  at  that  time  they  were 
appointing  as  the  day  of  the  Lord  that  Ascension  Sunday  that 
passed  two  years  ago.  I  cannot  jest  here  at  that  murderous  sect, 
for  the  deed  was  too  atrocious  to  admit  any  mirth.  They  assert 
for  many  other,  but  especially  for  this  reason,  that  a  Christian 
may  not  exercise  the  magistracy,  that  a  Christian  may  kill  no  one. 
And  at  the  same  time  they  all  deny  that  they  can  judge  that  crime 
I  have  been  describing.  A  parricide  therefore  is  not  charged 
among  them,  while  a  homicide  is. 

Now  I  return  to  the  matter.  Not  without  reason  will  they  not 
reckon  among  believers  the  children  of  believers  who  live  with 
the  church ;  they  put  them  among  the  things  that  are  common, 
for  they  make  a  man  as  valuable  as  a  beast — nay,  a  beast  loves 
more  truly  a  kindred  beast  than  that  murderer  his  own  brother. 
What  is  there  wonderful  then  about  their  using  virgins  and 
matrons  as  they  do  beasts  and  baggage  animals?  Among  them 
it  is  no  crime  to  lay  murderous  hand  upon  a  brother ;  how  much 
less  will  they  hear  an  accusation  of  adultery  and  lewdness  ! 
Those  who  are  rebaptized  unite  with  a  church  that  denies,  if  they 


172  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

themselves  commit  it,  that  adultery  and  harlotry  is  a  crime.  For 
to  that  purport  once  he  who  is  now  a  shade  said  to  me,  when 
they  were  asserting  that  they  were  without  sin  :  They  would  at 
once  shut  out  from  the  church  him  who  committed  any  wrong. 
I  at  once  reminded  him  of  the  man  who  had  committed  adultery 
at  Wesen  ;*  he  repHed  :  Even  though  he  committed  adultery,  he 
did  not  sin.  They  who  are  in  our  church  cannot  sin.  Then  I 
said:  So  adultery  is  not  sin  among  you?  There  is  no  adultery 
with  us,  he  said  :  I  will  not  say  whether  [adultery]  is  sin  or  not^ 
but  that  is  not  adultery  which  you  think  is.  For  since  we  have 
one  and  the  same  spirit  nothing  can  take  place  with  us  which  is 
sin,  for  as  we  have  one  spirit  so  also  we  have  one  body.  This 
sentiment  they  now  preach  in  open  terms.  Those  who  are  re- 
baptized  unite  also  with  a  church  that  does  not  know  to  judge 
parricide  [fratricide].  But  the  most  noble  senate  of  St.  Gall — 
a  city  that  is  most  regardful  of  the  glory  of  Christ-  executed 
the  parricide  [fratricide]  at  the  prayers  of  parents  and  kinsmen, 
and  thereafter,  a  sign  being  given  by  the  Lord,  suppressed  so 
prudently  this  evil  that  nowhere  are  there  fewer  Catabaptists, 
although  in  the  beginning  their  number  was  very  great.  For 
that  whole  family  had  been  immersed,  and  the  house  itself  was 
the  meeting  place  of  the  Catabaptists — the  house  where  a  brother 
dipped  his  murderous  hand  in  his  brother's  blood.  From  this 
one  might  rightly  say  that  it  was  stricken  with  death  by  divine 
justice,  both  on  account  of  the  family  and  the  Catabaptists. 

Catabaptists.  Otherwise  Zrvingli  would  be  compelled  to  admit 
because  of  the  following  context  that  infants  sold  their  goods  and 
distributed  them,  which  is  impossible,  and  has  nothing  to  do  with 
them,  for  the  property  was  their  believing  parents'.  And  from 
the  context  it  would  follow  that  the  infants  who  are  reckoned 
among  believers,  and  so  baptized,  were  obliged  to  celebrate  the 

*  At  the  west  end  of  the  Lake  of  Walenstadt,  no  mean  rival  of  Lake  Lucerne, 
some  twenty  miles  southeast  of  Zurich.  There  Zwingli  had  passed  his  boyhood 
in  his  uncle's  house. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  173 

Lord's  Supper  because  they  were  baptized.  Similarly  they  must 
have  prayer  with  the  other  believers,  for  the  preceding  and  fol- 
lowing context  is  as  follows  :  And  they  continued  steadfastly  in 
the  apostles'  doctrine  and  fellowship,  and  in  breaking  of  bread 
and  prayer.  Who  steadfastly  continued?  All  that  became 
believers.  If  then  infants  became  believers,  or  were  numbered 
with  them,  they  also  broke  bread,  which  no  reason  can  make  out, 
and  they  were  also  not  baptized.  For  if  they  were  baptized,  they 
also  broke  bread,  which  Zwingli  himself  will  not  maintain.  Now 
see  how  synecdoche  hangs  together  ! 

Reply.  Why  do  you  charge  me  viciously  with  a  skill  in  arguing 
which  I  never  assumed,  but  [which]  is  deceitfully  attributed  by 
those  who  cannot  sustain  the  force  of  the  truth  on  which  I  rely, 
since  this  whole  paragraph  is  only  vicious  reasoning?  For  when 
you  oppose  synecdoche,  you  make  clear  that  you  do  not  yet  see 
what  synecdoche  is.  For  you  do  not  yet  understand  that  there 
is  no  synecdoche  where  the  words  are  received  in  their  simple 
and  true  sense.  For  where  this  is  the  case  there  is  no  figure. 
That  discourse  is  figurative  which  does  not  bring  us  the  sense 
which  the  first  aspect  of  the  words  carries.  Synecdoche  is  a 
figure,  so  where  synecdoche  is  some  other  than  the  open  meaning 
is  hidden.  Hence  when  you  thus  infer :  If  infants  were  num- 
bered among  the  believers,  they  broke  bread,  prayed,  sold  their 
goods  and  distributed  to  the  needy,  you  take  everything  according 
to  the  letter.  What  then?  Do  you  wish  to  eliminate  synecdoche 
from  the  passage?  Why  not  say  then:  This  passage  does  not 
admit  synecdoche,  and  then  prove  it  by  argument  and  evidence? 
But  this  cannot  be  done,  since  I  have  proved  more  than  suffic- 
iently above  that  infants  belong  to  the  family  of  the  parents,  and 
that  you  act  not  only  impiously,  but  inhumanly,  when  you  prefer 
to  include  believers'  infants  among  baggage  and  goods  rather 
than  among  believers.  If,  however,  you  have  come  to  the  poin 
of  confessing  this  discourse  to  be  figurative  indeed,  but  here 
require  of  synecdoche  that  whatever  is  said  of  the  whole  body  be 


174  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

true  of  all  its  parts  (as  every  one  sees  you  do  think  when  he  looks 
closely  into  your  teachings),  you  are  wholly  in  error.  For  that  is 
not  synecdoche  where,  as  we  have  said,  what  is  said  of  the  whole 
is  true  of  each  part,  for  then  there  is  no  figure.  But  that  is 
synecdoche  when  a  part  of  any  body  is  received  for  the  whole,  or 
the  whole  for  a  part.  I  have  shown  this  by  the  clearest  examples. 
Still,  that  you  may  be  supplied  with  all  abundantly,  hear  this.  In 
Ex.  xxiii.  1 7  it  is  written  :  Three  times  a  year  all  thy  males  shall 
appear  before  the  Lord  thy  God.  Notice  this  word  "  all."  Tell 
me,  then,  were  infants  in  the  cradle  from  all  Palestine  carried 
thrice  a  year  to  Jerusalem^  If  so,  then  according  to  your  argu- 
ment, they  ate  unleavened  bread  for  seven  days,  sowed  the  fields 
and  offered  the  firstfruits.  But  since  they  did  not  do  this  it 
follows  that  [all]  males  were  not  included.  If  they  were  not 
brought  it  is  not  true  that  every  male  appeared  thrice  a  year 
before  the  Lord.  "All  males "  is  therefore  synecdoche,  and 
however  on  first  appearance  it  seems  as  though  every  male  is 
ordered  to  be  present  at  the  three  feasts,  they  alone  are  bound 
by  the  law  who  were  so  old  that  they  could  receive  the  instruc- 
tion or  offer  firstfruits  or  bear  branches  of  trees,  according  to  the 
variety  of  the  feast  or  manner  of  celebration.  So  also  when  Deut. 
xxxi.  T1-13  speaks  of  appearing  at  the  reading  of  the  law  at 
the  celebration  of  [the  feast  of]  tabernacles  it  appears  that  those 
boys  came  who  were  beginning  to  understand  what  was  read. 
So  also  Luke  ii.  42  shows  from  Christ,  who  when  12  years  old 
was  a  participant  at  the  Passover,  that  they  appeared  who  could 
themselves  make  the  journey  and  understand  what  was  done.  At 
the  feast  of  Pentecost  it  appeared  that  they  alone  went  up  who 
offered  the  firstfruits,  a  duty  of  the  father  or  his  representative. 
Here  therefore  is  synecdoche.  Again,  Ex.  xxxiv.  19  :  Every 
male  that  openeth  the  womb  shall  be  mine.  This  can  not  bear 
synecdoche.  For  it  so  pertains  to  all  the  firstborn  [males]  that 
none  is  left  exempt.  I  think  you  now  see  how  crude  and  un- 
learned is  your  argumentation,  since  you  do  not  deny  synecdoche 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 75 

in  the  passage  :  They  who  believed  were  together,  yet  contend 
that  all  must  be  predicated  of  each  part  that  is  contained  in  the 
whole  of  which  the  synecdoche  treats.  But  you  do  not  consider 
the  composition  of  the  word  itself — sun  and  ex  with  dechomat,  as  if 
you  would  say :  When  I  take  the  whole  body  I  understand  some- 
thing separate  from  among  those  things  which  are  together 
included  in  that  body.  Or  :  When  I  take  some  part  of  the  body 
I  understand  the  whole  body.  So  that  the  Latin  comprehensio 
does  not  quite  correspond  with  the  Greek.  Then  when  you  con- 
tend thus :  If  then  infants  were  counted  among  the  believers,  or 
were  made  believers,  they  also  broke  the  bread,  a  thing  that 
cannot  at  all  be,  and  so  they  were  not  baptized.  For  if  they 
were  baptized,  they  would  also  have  broken  the  bread.  You 
reason  wretchedly,  so  that  it  is  clear  to  all  who  read  your  produc- 
tions with  judgment  that  you  are  all  impostors.  For  since  you 
leaders  are  not  so  untaught  as  not  to  see  how  wretchedly  you 
reason,  and  since  none  the  less  you  offer  to  the  untaught  vicious 
syllogisms,  you  cannot  be  saved  from  being  impostors  even  by 
the  Saviour  himself.  For  what  constrains  it  to  follow  here  that 
they  who  were  baptized  also  broke  bread?  Were  there  not 
among  the  ancients  circumcised  infants  who  yet  did  not  tear  the 
lamb  nor  eat  unleavened  bread?  Or  because  thrice  a  year  they 
were  not  present,  were  they  therefore  not  of  God's  people?  Learn 
then  that  infants  were  counted  among  believers  and  were  bap- 
tized, and  that  of  believers  those  actually  believed,  prayed,  dis- 
tributed property,  broke  the  Lord's  bread,  who  had  come  to  such 
age  and  understanding  as  to  be  fitted  for  this  and  subject  to  the 
observance,  as  is  clear  from  the  examples  drawn  from  Exodus 
and  Deuteronomy.  Every  male  was  directed  to  be  present  at  the 
feast,  the  women  and  boys  at  the  reading  of  the  law ;  but  how- 
ever the  letter  reads,  by  synecdoche  is  understood  every  class 
according  to  its  manner  and  understanding.  What  have  squalling 
[infants]  to  do  with  the  reading  of  the  law,  or  adolescents  with 
the  offering  of  firstfruits,  unless  the  father  directs  them? 


176  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

The  thing  itself  compels  me  willy  nilly,  good  reader,  to  cease 
to  give  the  vain  words  of  the  Catabaptists  and  to  draw  to  a  close. 
So  hereafter  I  will  act  thus  :  I  will  untie  every  knot,  and  what- 
ever is  said  by  them  that  has  any  force  I  will  adduce  with  such 
fidelity  as  I  have  thus  far  in  rendering  it  literally  into  Latin.  And 
for  this  reason  in  particular,  that  what  they  have  thus  far  adduced 
against  the  figurative  sense  has  been  in  great  part  refuted.  What 
they  have  argued  about  the  Testament  will  be  so  treated  and 
torn  away  when  we  reach  the  Testament. 

The  arguments  against  the  synecdoche  in  i  Cor.  x.  9  :  All  our 
fathers  were  under  the  cloud,  they  all  crossed  the  sea,  all  were 
baptized  unto  Moses,  all  ate  the  same  spiritual  food — the  argu- 
ments, I  say,  that  they  bark  out  against  these  synecdoches  are  so 
foolish  and  impure  that  they  are  not  to  be  taken  into  account- 
For  they  say  they  know  that  they  ate,  drank,  crossed  the  sea, 
went  to  stool  and  urinated,  but  it  must  be  proved  by  us  by  clear- 
Scripture  that  infants  were  baptized.  After  that  they  insult  ug 
this  way  :  See  now  how  Zwingli  stands  with  his  synecdoche,  which 
he  affirms  with  his  own  peculiar  cunning  and  sophistry,  lest  by 
acknowledging  the  truth  he  may  suffer  the  persecution  of  the 
cross  of  Christ.  What  can  you  do  with  these  men?  That  I  might 
expound  synecdoche  correctly  I  adduced  these  examples,  which 
they  are  so  far  from  tearing  away  that  he  who  will  may  use  them, 
not  only  as  examples  of  synecdoche,  but  to  show  also  that  in  the 
apostles'  time  believers'  infants  were  baptized,  as  I  have  indicated 
above.  They  approach  the  matter  with  bitterness,  since  they 
can  do  nothing  by  the  sharp  energy  of  the  word  of  God.  They 
charge  cunning  and  sophistry,  which  I  so  express  my  abhorrence 
of  that  all  my  writings  can  free  me  from  the  charge  better  than 
any  oration  prepared  for  this  purpose.  But  I  recognize  and  cher- 
ish the  truth.  And  I  should  have  to  endure  nothing  if  I  should 
adopt  your  opinion,  unless  you  are  most  mendacious,  for  you  have 
promised  oftener  than  I  can  say  that  all  will  eventuate  happily  if 
I  join  you.    But  you  had  to  have  recourse  to  calumnies  and  shouts 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST  TRICKS.     '  177 

when  you  undertook  to  overthrow  synecdoche,  for  you  saw  this  to 
be  impossible.  This  remains,  and  will  ever  remain,  synecdoche  : 
The  fathers  were  all  baptized,  the  fathers  all  ate  the  same  spiritual 
food  with  us,  as  was  shown  in  the  foregoing  sufficiently  and  will 
be  treated  again  in  the  following.  Thus  far  I  have  replied  to  the 
first  part  of  your  refutation,  to  the  rest  I  will  do  the  same  in  the 
course  of  the  disputation.     Now  I  proceed  to  the  second  part. 

SECOND  PART. 

This  part  is  to  overthrow  the  foundations  of  your  superstition ; 
although  you  have  never  published  them,  yet  hardly  any  of  your 
people  exist  who  have  not  a  copy  of  these  well  founded  laws,  as  you 
call  them.  Why,  pray,  do  you  not  publish  what  are  so  divine  and  so 
salutary?  But  counsels  evilly  conceived  fear  the  light,  and  are 
terrified  at  the  judgment  of  learned  and  pious  men.  For  this 
reason  you  do  not  publish  the  dogmas,  articles,  principles  of  your 
superstition.  I  therefore  shall  expose  them  to  the  world,  trans- 
lated faithfully  and  literally  into  Latin.  As  in  the  first  part,  your 
position  shall  come  first,  then  the  refutation.  .      /  ^  ,.,'^ 


TITLE    OF    THE    CONSTITUTION    OF    THE    SECT    OF    THE    CATABAPTISTS. 

Articles  which  we  have  drawn  up  and  to  which  we  agree,  viz. : 
Baptism,  abstention,  breaking  of  bread,  avoidance  of  abominable 
pastors  in  the  church,  [of  love],  sword  and  [of  wrong]  oath. 

To  this  article  I  say  the  same  as  the  apostle  in  Col.  ii.  20  :  If 
ye  be  dead  with  Christ  from  the  elements  of  the  world,  how  is  it 
that  you  set  forth  decrees  or  dogmas  as  though  you  were  in  the 
world  ?  But  I  know  what  you  will  say  :  These  are  not  human 
dogmas,  articles,  principles,  but  divine  oracles.  To  which  I  reply  : 
Why  then  do  you  say  you  have  drawn  them  up  and  agreed  to 
them?  If  they  are  divine,  why  do  you  call  them  the  articles  of 
your  conspiracy?  Why  do  you  smear  the  mouth  of  the  divine 
word  with  your  human  ordure?  If  not  [divine],  why  do  you 
impose  new  decrees  upon   the  necks    of   your   brethren?     You 


178  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

would  therefore  rule  in  the  Lord's  stead,  secretly  lead  into 
captivity,  and  place  a  check  on  brethren's  liberty.  For  however 
you  turn  you  need  no  new  articles ;  divine  providence  does  not 
need  your  consent,  which  is  nothing  else  than  conspiracy.  But 
thus  heavenly  wisdom  orders  all  things.  As  often  as  we  apply  to 
you  the  term  "sect,"  because  you  have  withdrawn  from  the  churches 
that  confess  and  embrace  Christ,  you  at  once  reply  that  you 
cherish  no  sect.  And  now  you  yourselves  produce  this  beautiful 
offspring  of  yours.  Is  not  he  a  heretic  who  has  conspired  unto 
particular  articles,  though  you  with  a  more  respectable  nomen- 
clature denominate  it  an  agreement?  But  now  I  turn  to  the 
overthrow  of  the  foundations  of  your  articles,  so  that  the  world 
may  see  that  what  you  affirm  to  be  divine  is  fanatical,  foolish, 
bold,  impudent.     This  is  not  too  severe. 

Catabaptists.  First  learn  of  baptism.  Baptism  should  be 
administered  to  all  who  have  been  taught  penitence  and  change 
of  life,  and  who  believe  really  that  their  sins  are  done  away  with 
through  Christ,  and  in  general  who  wish  to  walk  in  the  resurrec- 
tion of  Jesiis  Christ,  and  who  wish  to  be  buried  with  himself  into 
death  that  they  may  rise  again  with  him.  So  we  administer  it  to 
all  who  demand  it  and  require  it  of  us  themselves  after  this 
manner.  By  this  all  baptism  of  infants  is  excluded — that  chief 
abomination  of  the  Roman  pontiff.  For  this  article  we  have  the 
testimony  and  support  of  Scripture ;  we  have  also  the  custom  of 
the  apostles,  which  we  shall  preserve  in  simplicity  and  also  in 
firmness.     For  we  have  been  made  sure. 

Reply.  Behold,  good  reader,  in  how  many  ways  these  jugglers 
impose  upon  the  judgment  of  the  simple.  For,  first,  who  does 
not  know  that  baptism  should  be  administered  to  all  in  Christ, 
both  penitents  and  those  confessing  that  remission  of  sins  is 
found?  There  is  no  contest  here,  but  whether  it  may  be  given  to 
those  alone  and  not  to  their  infant  children.  Second,  they  con- 
ceal justification  by  works,  and  though  they  admit  remission  of 
sins  through  Christ  here,  they  clearly  deny  it  elsewhere.     For 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST    TRICKS.  1 79 

they  who  trust  in  works  make  Christ  of  no  effect.  For  if  justi- 
,  fication  is  by  the  works  of  the  law,  Christ  has  died  in  vain.  Third, 
they  yet  do  not  conceal  it  so  thoroughly  as  to  betray  their  opinion 
by  no  sign.  For  when  they  say  that  remitted  are  the  sins  of  all 
who  wish  to  walk  in  the  resurrection  of  Christ  and  to  be  buried 
with  him  in  death,  they  elevate  free  will,  and  next  to  that  justifica- 
tion by  works.  For  if  it  is  in  our  choice  or  power  to  walk  in  the 
resurrection  of  Christ,  or  to  be  buried  with  him  in  death,  it  is 
open  for  any  one  to  be  a  Christian  and  a  man  of  perfect  excel- 
lence. Then  Christ  spoke  falsely  the  words  :  No  one  can  come 
to  me  except  the  Father  who  sent  me  draw  him.  Finally  here  is 
discovered  their  chiefest  evil :  When  they  refuse  an  oath  to  the 
magistrate  who  asks  it,  they  plead  this  reason :  According  to  the 
word  of  Christ  a  man  cannot  change  a  hair  of  his  head  to"  make 
it  shine  white  or  be  dim  with  blackness.  But  here  they  say : 
They  who  wish  to  walk  according  to  him,  and  then :  Who  them- 
selves demand  of  us ;  after,  of  course,  they  have  promised  that 
they  will  walk  according  to  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  Will  he 
then  who  makes  this  promise  be  able  to  walk  according  to  the 
stipulation  or  not?  If  so,  why  then  will  he  not  swear  to  do  this 
or  that  when  he  is  able  ?  If  not,  you  in  like  manner  ought  not 
to  demand  that  he  promise  to  walk  according  to  Christ  lest  he 
become  a  liar,  as  you  forbid  him  to  swear  lest  he  become  a  per- 
jurer. Fourth,  where  in  the  Scripture  do  you  read  that  baptism 
is  to  be  given  none  except  to  him  who  can  make  a  confession 
and  demand  baptism?  Of  yourselves  do  you  assert  this,  for 
circumcision  was  most  often  given  to  those  who  could  neither 
make  confession  nor  demand.  But  you  reject  the  whole  Old 
Testament.  This  is  what  you  clearly  betray  in  the  former  con- 
futation. This  point  ought  to  have  been  treated  by  me,  but  it 
has  fallen  out.  It  therefore  comes  in  properly  here  when  you 
say :  There  is  no  need  for  me  to  seek  baptism  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment. By  which  do  you  not  despise  the  Old  Testament?  And 
yet  Christ  submitted  himself  and  his  teaching  to  it,  and    the 


I50  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

apostles  used  no  other  Scripture,  indeed  they  could  not,  since 
until  after  the  beginning  of  their  preaching  there  was  no  Scrip- 
ture as  yet  other  than  that  drawn  from  [the  Old  Testament]. 
Here  therefore  your  error,  in  which  you  do  not  consider  the 
analogy  of  the  sacrament  as  does  the  apostle  Paul  in  i  Cor.  x. 
and  Col.  iii.,  so  that  we  ought  not  to  neglect  his  example— -your 
error,  I  say,  causes  you  to  deny  that  in  all  Scripture  the  sign 
of  the  covenant  is  given  to  any  except  to  one  who  makes 
confession  and  demand  according  to  your  way  of  thinking. 
But  is  not  this  deciding  dogmas  and  ordinances?  Fifth, 
you  say :  We  have  the  testimony  and  support  of  Scripture  for 
this  article.  Who  hes?  to  use  a  German  taunt.  Produce  that 
Scripture  testimony  of  yours,  and  all  strife  will  be  laid.  Sixth, 
where  do  you  find  this  custom  of  the  apostles  to  baptize  no  one 
who  had  not  made  this  confession  of  yours  and  forthwith  de- 
manded baptism?  Seventh,  they  say:  Which  we  simply  and  at 
the  same  time  firmly  will  preserve.  For  we  have  been  made 
sure.  Why  do  they  promise  to  do  what  is  not  in  their  power? 
But  if  they  refer  to  baptism,  /.  ^.,  that  they  will  baptize  according 
to  this  rite,  again  they  dogmatize,  /.  <?.,  make  decrees.  This  they 
themselves  recognize,  for  they  add  :  For  we  have  been  made 
sure.  If  they  could  show  from  Scripture  the  firmness  of  these 
ordinances,  they  would  doubtless  adduce  it.  But  since  they 
cannot,  they  have  recourse  to  revelation  and  the  confirmation 
of  the  Spirit.  We  are  made  sure,  they  say — himself  said 
it.  Here  we  ought  not  to  omit  in  passing  the  fact  that  this 
has  caused  their  error  about  the  resurrection — they  do  not  see 
that  Paul  in  Rom.  vi.  4  uses  an  argument  from  the  external 
sign  in  order  to  exhort  the  more  ardently  to  the  imitation  of 
Christ.  But  wherever  they  find  the  word  baptism,  even  though 
the  discussion  is  not  about  the  sacrament,  the  truth  striving  to 
the  contrary,  they  twist  it  to  some  perversion. 

Catabaptists.     Second.  This  is  our  opinion  regarding  absten- 
tion or  excommunication  :  All  ought  to  be  excommunicated  who 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  l8l 

after  they  have  given  themselves  to  the  Lord  that  they  may  walk 
in  his  precepts,  and  who  have  been  baptized  into  the  one  body  of 
Christ  and  are  called  brothers  or  sisters,  yet  either  slip  or  fall 
into  sin  and  imprudently  are  thrown  headlong.  Men  of  this  so^t 
ought  to  be  admonished  twice  in  private ;  the  third  time  they 
should  be  corrected  publicly  before  the  church  according  to  the 
precept  of  Christ.  But  this  ought  to  be  done  according  to  the 
ordinance  and  command  of  the  divine  Spirit  before  the  breaking 
of  bread,  so  that  all  who  break  and  eat  one  bread  and  drink  from 
one  cup  may  be  together  in  unison  in  the  same  love. 

Reply.  If  I  am  silent  as  to  this  law  I  shall  seem  to  approve  it, 
but  if  I  touch  on  certain  things  I  shall  appear  captious.  Since 
then  it  is  all  so  crude  that  it  smells  of  nothing  but  a  three  days' 
theologian,  I  will  myself  suffer  that  in  this  place  ignorance  be 
called  simplicity,  and  will  note  in  a  few  words  a  few  things  which 
ought  not  to  be  winked  at.  They  err  then  in  this  when  they 
say :  The  third  time  they  ought  to  be  corrected  publicly  before 
the  assemblage.  For  the  third  time  they  should  be  admonished 
by  the  church,  not  corrected.  Then  if  they  hear  not  the  church 
as  it  warns  they  should  be  expelled.  Second,  they  err  again 
when  they  say  this  should  be  before  the  breaking  of  bread,  unless 
you  understand  by  this  the  denunciation  customary  among  the 
ancients,  which  only  forbade  to  the  excommunicated  who  had 
before  been  cast  out  the  breaking  of  bread  with  them.  Ex- 
communication did  not  take  place  then  unless  the  occasion 
demanded  it,  but  access  was  denied  the  excommunicate  to  the 
feast  of  the  church.  This  I  say  because  it  is  the  Catabaptists' 
opinion  that  they  should  refuse  to  celebrate  the  communion  unless 
those  who  are  to  do  it  first  confess  or  bear  witness  that  they  are 
about  to  pronounce  excommunication  or  banishment  [from  the 
communion].  I  do  not  think  this  is  according  to  the  custom 
of  the  apostles,  who  seem  to  have  celebrated  the  supper  of  the 
Lord  without  interdict  of  this  sort.  But  where  one  had  been 
convicted  of  a  great  crime  he  was  already  banned.     And  I  think 


t82  zwingli  selections. 

it  sprung  from  that  usage  that  before  the  Lord's  Supper  the 
excommunicate  and  banned  were  publicly  interdicted.  I  do  not 
think  it  came  from  the  institution  of  Christ  that  some  ancients 
and  some  moderns  had  and  have  the  custom  of  thus  warning : 
Let  no  homicide,  usurer,  adulterer,  drunkard,  etc.,  approach. 
For  if  an  adulterer  or  drunkard,  or  one  addicted  to  any  other 
crime,  defile  the  church  he  ought  to  be  warned  according  to  the 
command  of  Christ,  and  if  he  refuse  to  confess  after  the  testi- 
mony of  witnesses  before  the  church  he  ought  to  be  shunned  or 
to  be  excluded  from  the  church,  but  so  ,only  if  contumacious. 
But  if  only  rumor  travels  around  (it  is  sometimes  mendacious), 
or  he  who  is  under  suspicion  can  rightly  ward  it  off,  so  that  he 
appears  to  carry  himself  honestly,  then  he  ought  not  rashly  to  be 
excommunicated,  unless  the  thing  is  absolutely  certain  for  which 
he  is  excommunicated.  This  I  say  not  of  myself,  but  after  com- 
paring carefully  and  weighing  the  words  of  Jesus  on  this  subject. 
For  when  he  says  to  Peter  that  one  is  to  be  forgiven  seventy-seven 
times,  and  in  another  place  orders  the  tares  to  be  permitted  to 
grow  until  harvest,  he  evidently  shows  that  there  are  some  things 
at  which  fraternal  love  may  wink.  But  when,  on  the  other  hand, 
he  commands  to  expel  straightway  after  the  reproof  of  the  church 
has  been  despised  he  surely  means  in  those  matters  which  are 
manifest  and  may  defile  the  church.  For  there  are  some,  sad  to 
say,  too  ready  on  one  side  or  the  other.  Some  who  think  that 
nothing  reaches  to  the  point  of  requiring  dismission,  perhaps 
because  they  labor  under  the  same  or  an  equal  disease ;  there  are 
others  who,  if  some  passion  persuades  them,  at  once  cry  out : 
Why  is  he  not  excommunicated?  Moderation  therefore  in  this 
matter  with  the  greatest  diligence  (which  is  to  be  sought  from 
the  Lord)  is  to  be  observed  here.  But  what  reason  is  there  why 
the  Catabaptists  should  say  aught  to  us  about  excommunication 
when  they  have  not  considered  the  judgment  of,  or  how  they 
ought  to  judge,  the  murder  that  took  place  in  St.  Gall,  when  a 
Catabaptist  murdered  a  Catabaptist  and  a  brother  a  brother? 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 83 

Caiabaptists.  Third.  In  the  breaking  of  bread  we  thus  agree 
and  unitedly  determine  that  they  who  wish  to  break  one  bread  in 
commemoration  of  the  broken  body  of  Christ,  and  to  drink  of 
one  cup  in  commemoration  of  his  shed  blood,  shall  first  come 
together  into  one  body  of  Christ,  that  is  the  church  of  God,  in 
which  Christ  is  the  head.  And  this  is  particularly  through  bap- 
tism. For,  as  the  divine  Paul  teaches,  we  cannot  be  at  the  same 
time  participants  of  the  Lord's  table  and  the  demons',  nor  can 
we  be  participants  at  the  same  time  of  the  Lord's  cup  and  the 
devils'.  /.  ^.,  all  who  have  communion  with  the  dead  works  of 
the  shades  have  no  communion  with  those  who  are  called  from 
this  world  to  God.  All  who  are  settled  in  evil  have  no  part  with 
the  good.  Therefore  it  ought  to  folovv  that  they  who  have  not 
the  calling  of  their  God  to  one  faith,  to  one  baptism,  to  one  spirit, 
to  one  body  with  all  the  sons  of  God,  they  cannot  unite  in  one 
bread.  But  doubtless  this  must  be  done  if  one  wish  to  break 
bread  according  to  the  precept  of  Christ. 

Reply.  Hither,  doubtless,  all  this  superstition  tends,  that  the 
unta,ught  people,  that  rises  to  every  novelty,  be  led  away  into 
catabaptism  and  to  an  evil  church.  You  admit  no  one  to  the 
Lord's  Supper  unless  he  have  first  united  by  baptism  into  the  one 
body  of  Christ.  So  by  baptism  as  by  a  cement  each  one  is 
united  to  this  body.  Why  then  do  you  strive  so  mightily  that 
no  one  be  baptized  unless  he  first  believe  and  confess  with  his 
own  mouth?  See  how  consistent  you  are  !  But  you  would  not 
speak  here  of  the  church's  baptism,  but  of  heretical  baptism, 
/.  ^.,  your  sect's,  and  this,  as  it  is  born  outside  the  church,  is 
justly  called  pseudo-  or  catabaptism  (some  prefer  "  anabap- 
tism  ").  Since  then  you  do  not  recognize  rebaptism  or  contra- 
baptism,  though  nevertheless  against  the  standing  custom  of 
Christ's  church  and  against  the  divine  law,  by  your  baptism  you 
crucify  Christ  again  (for  as  he  was  once  dead  and  once  wis 
raised  from  the  dead,  so  he  desires  to  have  once  baptized  him 
who  loves  Christ)  ;  you  do  not  dare  to  call  your  rebaptism  cata- 


1 84  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

baptism,  but  you  call  "  baptism  "  that  which  is  rebaptism.  And 
while  your  words  appear  as  though  you  were  unwilling  to  admit 
any  one  to  the  table  of  the  Lord  unless  he  has  been  baptized, 
what  you  mean  really  is  that  no  one  in  your  evil  church  should 
hope  to  be  a  participant  at  the  table  of  the  Lord  unless  he  has 
been  rebaptized.  This  is  what  you  mean,  1  say.  Behold  the 
tricks  of  the  impostors,  my  reader.  They  talk  simply  about  bap- 
tism, but  will  not  be  understood  about  simple  but  about  double 
baptism.  To  this  the  confirmation  of  their  law  bears  witness 
when  they  add :  For,  as  the  divine  Paul  teaches,  we  cannot  at 
the  same  time  participate  at  the  Lord's  table  and  at  demons'. 
By  which  they  mean  only  that  initiates  who  were  baptized  in 
youth  belong  to  the  demons,  though  they  beautifully  cover  up 
this  error  so  as  not  to  be  compelled  to  answer  a  new  question 
which  is  beyond  them,  t.  e.,  whether  the  baptism  which  we  as 
children  received  is  not  sufficient?  For  they  were  vanquished 
by  as  when  they  at  length  declared  this  baptism  to  be  from  the 
Roman  pontiff,  and  so  from  a  demon.  Nevertheless  they  carry 
around  a  long  document  in  their  church,  in  which  they  show 
from  the  decrees  of  the  pontiffs  that  infant  baptism  was  begun 
under  popish  rule — wicked  men  that  they  are,  since  I  showed 
them  before  that  in  Origen's  time,  who  lived  about  150  years 
after  Christ's  ascension,  baptism  was  in  common  use,  and  after- 
wards in  Augustine's  time,  who  flourished  about  400  years  after. 
For  both  testify  that  infant  baptism  had  remained  to  their  own 
times  from  the  custom  of  the  apostles.  But  in  those  times  the 
name  of  pope,  and  also  monarchy  or  tyranny,  had  not  come  into 
the  churches.  And  I  refuted  their  statement  (that  you  may  lose 
nothing  of  our  side,  reader,)  that  the  baptism  of  the  pope  is  not 
Christ's,  but  a  demon's,  in  the  following  way  :  If  baptism  were  of 
the  pope  alone,  I  would  not  object  to  their  calling  the  pope's  bap- 
tism either  "  not  Christ's  "  or  a  demon's.  But  the  baptism  of 
Christ  is  not  the  pope's,  even  though  the  pope  were  the  arch- 
demon  himself  and  used  Christ's  baptism,  for   when  the  devil 


REFUTATION   OF    BAFflST*  TRICKS.  1 85 

used  the  prophet's  word  in  the  temptation  of  Christ,  the  prophet's 
word  did  not  become  the  devil's;  and  again,  when  the  demons 
cried  out :  "  Thou  art  the  Christ  the  Son  of  the  living  God,"  so 
salutary  a  confession  was  no  less  salutary  because  a  demon  made 
it ;  so  when  the  pope  baptized  not  in  his  own  name,  but  in  that 
of  the  Father  and  Son  and  Holy  Ghost,  it  could  in  no  way  be 
vitiated  so  as  not  to  be  the  baptism  of  Christ's  church.  In  the 
second  place  Christ  himself  said  :  "  He  that  is  not  against  us  is 
with  us."  The  pope  therefore  has  this  much  of  good,  that  he 
baptizes  in  no  other  name  than  that  in  which  we  were  baptized  ; 
in  this  he  is  with  us  as  was  he  [with  Christ]  who  expelled  a 
demon  by  the  power  of  Christ's  name,  although  he  neither  fol- 
lowed nor  cherished  Christ.  Penally  the  apostles  have  left  us  in 
the  matter  of  matrimony  a  fine  example,  both  in  this  matter  and 
in  others  which  pertain  to  disputes  about  externals.  For  as  some 
had  married  among  the  Gentiles  before  the  apostles  had  carried 
to  them  the  salutary  teaching  of  the  gospel,  so  they  [the  apostles] 
left  those  marriages  intact.  This  is  clear  from  the  testimony  of 
Paul  in  I  Cor.  vii.  13,  where  he  commanded  the  faithful  wife  to 
dwell  with  the  unbelieving  husband,  provided  she  did  what  was 
pleasing  to  him.  This  is  nothing  but  the  confirmation  of  the 
marriage  laws  which  each  nation  had,  even  of  those  marriages 
entered  upon  in  idolatry.  Equally  therefore  we  may  not  repudiate 
a  baptism  which  is  not  only  not  founded  upon  the  pope's  invention 
or  authority,  but  depends  upon  the  authority  of  Christ  himself 
and  the  apostles.  For  the  popes  baptized  in  no  other  name  than 
that  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost.  But  in  whose  name  do 
they  suppose  marriages  among  idolaters  were  made?  Yet  the 
apostles  left  these  marriages  whole  and  intact,  no  matter  what 
the  laws  and  gods  under  which  they  were  undertaken.  The  more 
therefore  will  baptism  be  untouched  by  us  when  it  is  given  in  that 
name  in  which  we  give  it,  even  though  the  pope  have  adminis- 
tered it.  Then  they  offered  as  objection  too  hatefully  the  matters 
of  salt,  butter,  saliva,  mud  and  that  class  of  things,  nay,  even  the 
13 


1 86  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

prayers  made  over  infants,  on  the  ground  that  neither  John  nor 
the  apostles  are  said  to  have  begun  or  celebrated  baptism  with 
prayer.  To  which  I  replied,  first  as  to  ceremonial :  Christ  re- 
stored some  blind  men  to  sight  by  the  medium  of  touch  or  of  mud 
others  by  the  words  "  Receive  thy  sight  "  alone,  and  they  saw  no 
less  distinctly  who  regained  sight  by  the  medium  of  touch  or  mud 
than  they  who  did  by  the  words  alone.  But  we  care  nothing  for 
those  externals  if  the  church  orders  them  to  be  abolished,  and  it 
has  been  brought  about  that  it  forthwith  gave  the  order,  we  who 
preside  over  the  church  not  being  ignorant  that  in  the  beginnings 
of  the  church  there  was  need  of  these  things,  though  not  so  much 
was  attributed  to  them  as  in  oar  times,  whence  we  cut  them  oflf 
without  difficulty.  As  to  the  prayers  which  they  attempted  also 
to  tear  away,  I  replied  :  The  Lord  Jesus  himself  prayed  over  the 
infants  brought  to  him.  What  madness  is  it  then  to  be  unwilling 
that  we  pray  over  infants  !  I  had  the  best  of  it  in  this  part,  the 
Catabaptists  in  the  other.  All  this,  I  say,  they  know  and  conceal 
in  their  false  church,  or  rather  their  conspiracy.  And  so,  to  return 
from  my  digression,  since  they  know  from  these  reasons  and  this 
basis  of  Scripture  that  it  is  not  the  pope's  baptism,  but  Christ's, 
in  which  we  are  baptized,  and  yet  they  contemn  it,  it  is  clear  that 
they  act  by  no  right  or  reason,  but  in  violence  and  fury — by 
which  they  call,  though  not  truly  yet  plausibly,  their  own  rebap- 
tism  baptism — so  as  to  be  able  to  draw  the  hearts  of  the  untaught 
to  a  rebaptism. 

Finally,  lest  by  their  words  it  may  be  manifest  whither  they 
tend,  they  bring  finally  an  exposition  of  this  their  baptism  and 
separation,  /.  <?.,  they  say :  All  who  have  communion  with  the 
dead  works  of  the  shades  have  no  communion  with  those  who 
are  called  from  the  world  to  God.  You  will  consider  diligently 
all  this,  reader,  and  I  am  sure  you  will  discover  by  what  wiles  and 
stratagems  they  allure  to  their  conspriacy  untaught  men.  Do 
you  not  see  that  in  this  exposition  they  wish  to  seem  to  intend 
only  that  they  who  most  impudently  sin  ought  not  to  attend  the 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 87 

supper  of  the  Lord?  But  while  you  see  this  most  clearly,  do 
they  not  do  this  same  thing  under  the  action  of  the  law  of  excom- 
munication or  banning  that  immediately  precedes?  Therefore 
whither  reaches  the  treatment  of  one  and  the  same  cause  under 
two  constitutions?  You  infer  therefore  with  no  trouble  that  by 
this  principle  they  wish — no  matter  what  string  of  words  they 
put  together — that  he  who  would  come  with  them  to  the  table  of 
the  Lord  must  also  be  rebaptized  in  their  catabaptism,  and  that 
they  who  were  baptized  as  infants  these  men  consider  to  be  of 
the  devil's  table.  This  is  therefore  the  sense  of  their  exposition 
— men  who  have  gone  over  to  the  church  of  their  rebelHon  and 
conspiracy  belong  to  those  who  have  .been  called  of  God  from 
the  world,  but  they  who  will  not  with  them  betray  the  church  of 
Christ  belong  to  those  who  communicate  with  dead  works.  For 
their  words  and  daily  abuse  testify  to  this.  For  when  they  see 
marriages  or  public  feasts  celebrated  among  us  they  straightway 
cry  out :  They  are  Gentiles,  and  are  of  the  world,  not  of  the 
church.  And  they  accept  as  satisfactory  neither  that  Christ  and 
the  apostles  appeared  at  a  marriage  nor  that  the  tribes  of  Israel 
celebrated  joyously  three  times  a  year,  nor  that  the  Lord's  Supper 
would  have  perpetually  remained  a  friendly  feast  if  the  Corin- 
thians had  not  abused  it — or  indeed  anything  else.  You  see  how 
on  the  one  side  what  unjust  judges  they  are,  in  that  as  soon  as 
they  see  those  things  done  among  us  which  Christ  himself  did 
not  abhor,  they  traduce,  curse  and  condemn.  And  on  the  other 
hand,  how  sincerely  they  act  when  they  think  of  themselves  so 
finely  that  they  boast  that  they  are  the  people  who  have  been 
called  to  God  from  the  world.  As  if  indeed  lewdness,  adultery, 
murder,  hatred,  envy,  arrogance,  hypocrisy — in  which  these  people 
excel — all  mortals  were  not  worldly.  I  am  not  speaking  of  the  im- 
moderate expense,  voluptuousness  and  wantonness  of  marriages  and 
feasts,  but  I  am  so  far  from  condemning  joy  in  moderation  that  I 
think  he  who  takes  it  away  fiom  the  pious  will  have  to  restore  it 
with  interest.    In  a  word,  by  this  law  they  mean  that  no  one  shall 


1 88  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

approach  their  supper  unless  he  has  been  rebaptized,  unless  he 
has  been  called  to  God  from  the  world,  i.  e.,  unless  he  is  of  the 
church  and  heresy  of  the  Catabaptists.  For  whatever  they  do  or 
say,  a  conspiracy  it  is,  according  to  the  word  of  the  prophet  in 
Is.  viii.,  and  a  most  wretched  pretence.  For  what  iniquity  is 
equal  to  his  who  prefers  himself  to  others  on  account  of  his  inno- 
cence and  who  winks  at  no  slip  of  his  brother's,  when  he  ought 
to  forgive  seventy  and  seven  times,  even  if  he  were  really  most 
innocent  who  so  acts?  But  what  do  I?  They  were  not  of  us, 
therefore  they  have  gone  away  from  us. 

Catabaptists.  Fourth.  We  thus  decide  about  the  revolt,  sepa- 
ration and  avoidance,  which  ought  to  be  manifested  as  to  that 
evil  planted  by  the  devil — that  we  have  no  commerce  with  those 
nor  agree  with  them  in  the  communication  of  their  abominations, 
/.  e.,  inasmuch  as  all  who  have  not  yet  yielded  in  obedience  to 
faith,  and  have  not  yet  given  their  name  to  the  Lord  as  wishing 
to  do  his  will,  are  exceedingly  abominable  in  the  sight  of  God, 
therefore  nothing  is  done  by  them  that  is  not  abominable.  Now 
in  the  world  and  in  all  creation  there  is  nothing  else  but  good 
and  evil,  faithful  and  unfaithful,  darkness  and  light,  worldly  and 
those  out  of  the  world,  the  temple  of  the  Lord  and  idols,  Christ 
and  Belial,  and  no  one  of  these  can  have  part  with  the  other. 
Known  to  us  also  is  the  precept  of  the  Lord  in  which  he  orders 
us  to  separate  from  evil,  for  then  he  will  be  our  God  and  we 
shall  be  his  sons  and  daughters.  Hence  he  commanded  us  to  go 
forth  from  Babylon  and  the  Egyptian  land  lest  we  share  their 
evils  and  penalties  which  the  Lord  is  going  to  bring  upon  them. 
From  all  of  which  we  ought  to  learn  that  what  is  not  united  to 
our  God  and  Christ  is  nothing  but  an  abomination  which  we 
should  shun.  Here  we  understand  are  all  the  popish  and  secundo- 
popish  works  and  the  contentions  of  idolatry,  processions  to 
churches,  homes  of  feastings,  states  and  alliances  of  unbelief  and 
many  like  things.  They  are  held  by  the  world  in  esteem,  yet 
nevertheless  they  fight  and  lead  directly  against  the  precept  of 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  l8f 

Christ  according  to  the  measure  of  wickedness  that  is  in  the 
world.  We  ought  to  be  ahen  and  separate  from  all  of  these ; 
they  are  pure  abominations,  which  make  us  hateful  to  Christ,  who 
has  freed  us  from  servitude  to  the  flesh  and  made  us  fit  for  the 
service  of  God  through  the  spirit  of  God  which  he  has  given  us. 
By  the  strength  of  this  constitution  there  fall  away  from  us  the 
devilish  arms  of  violence,  such  as  swords  and  other  arms  and 
things  of  this  character,  and  all  use  of  them  for  either  friend  or 
enemy  by  reason  of  this  word  of  Christ :  Ye  must  not  resist  evil. 
Reply.  What  they  mean  by  so  confused  a  statement,  which  is 
so  torn  and  patched  that  it  contains  nothing  sound  and  fresh, 
you  would  hardly  divine  if  they  had  not  said  in  the  title  of  the 
work  that  they  dealt  with  the  avoidance  of  abominable  pastors  in 
the  church.  First,  they  have  so  heaped  together  those  statements 
of  nothing  in  the  world  but  good  and  evil,  Christ  and  Belial,  and 
the  other  matters  these  divine  men  have  piled  up  together,  that 
they  would  be  very  fine,  and  would  give  a  reason  for  not  assem- 
bling in  our  churches.  You  must  not  suppose  this  is  horror  of 
popish  pastors.  It  is  against  us  they  rail  in  this  fashion.  For 
they  meet  with  the  popish  and  do  not  shun  their  meetings.  We 
who  stand  by  the  gospel  are  assailed  here.  The  reason  is  that 
we  alone  show  up  and  shun  catabaptism  and  their  wholesale 
sedition.  By  the  papists  we  are  called  heretics,  by  the  catabap- 
tists  secundopapists,  because  we  preserve  in  the  church  infant 
baptism  and  some  other  things  which  they  will  have  nothing  of. 
So  are  we  exercised  in  the  Lord's  glory  that  we  may  bring  to  him 
a  victory  the  more  excellent  the  more  numerous  those  are  by 
whom  we  are  assailed.  I  will  show  in  a  few  words  the  deceit 
they  conceal  in  the  words  of  this  article.  What  they  allege  from 
Scripture  about  separation  is  not  said  in  the  sense  to  which  they 
wrest  it.  For  otherwise  we  should  be  compelled  to  retire  not 
only  from  the  world,  as  Paul  says,  but  also  from  the  church. 
For  there  is  nothing  human  so  holy  and  blameless  that  it  does 
not  fail  in  some  part.     We  ought  therefore  first  to  be  separated 


IQO  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

from  ourselves,  of  which  Christ  also  speaks.  Who  hates  his  own 
life  in  this  world,  he  says,  saves  it  for  life  eternal.  This  separa- 
tion results  when  we  daily  set  forth  a  desire  for  betterment,  and 
with  our  might  exhort  the  brethren  to  this  by  example  and 
prayer.  But  according  to  this  we  do  not  seek  to  be  separate 
from  those  who  have  infirmities  in  common  with  us.  The  thing 
itself  warns  us,  if  only  we  be  truly  pious  and  cherish  God,  how 
far  in  each  case  we  must  bear.  Nay,  we  should  hear  piety  alone 
in  this  matter  of  condemning  or  seceding,  so  that  establishing 
another  law  is  neither  possible  nor  due.  Second,  we  are  sepa- 
rated from  those  who  are  not  weak,  but  malign,  a  thing  that  both 
piety  and  love  will  teach.  For  Christ  himself  also  taught  that 
the  contumacious  and  impudently  wicked  man  ought  to  be 
shunned  only  when  he  had  reached  in  obstinacy  the  point  of  not 
respecting  the  church.  But  I  know  whither  tends  this  supercilious 
avoidance.  As  soon  as  they  have  allured  one  to  their  faction, 
above  all  they  forbid  him  to  go  for  a  month  at  least,  if  they  can- 
not get  it  for  all  time  or  for  longer,  to  any  assemblage  where  one 
teaches  who  is  opposed  to  their  sect.  And  this  order  is  at  the 
beginning  strongly  suspected  by  those  who  are  not  yet  wholly 
demented.  Indeed,  many  who  return  to  a  good  mind  testify  to 
this.  For  they  mimediately  think  of  the  apostles'  ;  "  Prove  all 
things."  In  order  that  by  the  figure  of  anticipating  arguments 
they  may  cut  off  consideration  of  this  among  foolish  men,  they 
show  great  diligence  in  inculcating  separation.  They  therefore 
condemn  conventions,  even  those  in  which  for  the  most  honor- 
able purposes  the  city  holds  assembly,  for  there  are  always  found 
men  who  arraign  the  audacity  of  the  men.  And  it  is  strange 
that  they  have  omitted  here  what  elsewhere  they  have  urged  as 
a  prime  objection.  In  the  assembhes  of  the  city  [they  allege] 
murders  often  take  place — as  if  this  did  not  happen  more  fre- 
quently in  the  market  place  and  the  country.  According  to  that 
we  must  not  assemble  in  the  country  or  the  market  place.  They 
condemn  also  the  processions  to  the  churches ;  they  do  this  with 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  I9I 

such  a  form  of  words  as  might  seem  to  apply  to  those  votive 
processions  which  we  formerly  engaged  in  to  the  image  at  Lau- 
retum,  Baden,  Oetingen  and  elsewhere,  while  really  they  con- 
demn the  processions  to  the  churches  appointed  for  certain  days. 
These  grieve  them,  for  they  prefer  those  where  many  meet  in 
some  wood  by  night  rather  than  by  day,  when  the  way  home  has 
to  be  felt  out  through  the  dense  darkness  by  the  more  comely 
girls  and  matrons,  and  they  consummate  spiritual  marriages  with 
carnal  copulation ;  or  where  two  or  three  meet  at  the  house  of  b 
man  who  is  a  little  better  off,  and  eat  and  chat,  lead  astray  the 
women,  and  in  a  word  do  many  things  you  would  hardly  dare 
imagine.  By  this  hunting  they  find  much  greater  booty  than  if 
their  auditors  should  hear  in  the  assemblage  of  the  churches 
what  is  against  their  doctrines.  For  who  will  protect  the  foolish 
girls  and  women  and  countrymen  and  simpletons  from  wolves  of 
this  sort  when  they  never  openly  appear,  nor  after  the  manner  of 
the  apostles  go  to  the  synagogues  first  and  disclose  the  sources  of 
their  doctrines  in  the  Scriptures.*  But  for  some  months  they  will 
waste  the  time  with  some  worthless  idler  and  contaminate  the 
whole  family  not  only  with  error,  but  with  harlotry  also,  and  then 
appear  in  some  spot.  And  as  soon  as  they  are  asked  to  give  the 
reason  for  their  doctrine  they  fly  away  and  leave  the  featherless 
chick  to  the  hawk.  Thus  they  are  at  variance  with  both  the 
word  and  institution  of  Christ,  who  both  said  :  "  In  secret  have  I 
said  nothing,"  and  commanded  that  what  they  heard  in  the  ear 
they  should  preach  upon  the  housetop.  Now  see  these  circum- 
cised !  Having  gained  permission  of  some  house  owner  they 
ascend  the  roof,  and  there  caw  out  that  they  are  now  fulfilling 
what  Christ  said  :  preach  upon  the  housetop,  etc.  But  when  a 
traveler  or  policeman  is  seen  at  a  distance  they  turn  tail,  as  is 
recorded  in  the  fable  of  the  little  fox.     Now  they  condemn  states 

*  The  authorities,  with  Zwingli's  assent,  first  forced  these  oppressed  people 
into  holding  secret  meetings,  if  they  met  at  all,  and  now  Zwingli  taunts  them 
for  their  secrecy !     Alas. 


192  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

also,  not  seeing  that  Paul  preserved  himself  from  violence  by  this 
one  means.  Is  it  not  clear  now  that  they  have  come  to  the 
point  of  obscuring  all  things,  of  dissolving  all  friendship  and  all 
union?  Who  ever  forbade  one  to  be  a  citizen?  These  learned 
men  have  spoken  of  alliances  of  unfaithfulness  in  place  of  alliances 
of  the  unfaithful  after  the  Hebrew  style.  Alliances  then  are  to 
be  given  up,  unless  we  are  not  ready  to  make  shipwreck  by  their 
baptism.  Do  you  see  whither  they  tend?  For  they  add  that 
they  are  sheer  abominations  which  make  us  hateful  to  Christ, 
who  has  freed  us  from  the  servitude  to  the  flesh,  etc.  What  is 
this  servitude  of  which  they  speak?  Of  course  it  is  obedience  to 
the  Christian  church,  assemblage  in  all  honesty  at  public  meet- 
ings and  in  private  interests  of  brotherhood  for  the  sake  of  order 
and  quiet,  where  obligations  that  are  lawfully  undertaken  and 
cannot  be  left  undischarged  without  injury  and  similar  observances 
are  preserved.  Freedom  from  these  and  all  obligations,  I  say, 
these  pious  interpreters  in  this  matter  assert  in  somewhat  obscure 
terms  at  present  they  have  received  from  Christ,  but  they  will 
preach  this  openly  as  soon  as  they  have  gained  a  church  upon 
the  strength  of  which  they  suppose  they  can  rely.  So  that  new 
tragedies  are  to  be  looked  for  by  us.  I  do  not  greatly  condemn 
that  carrying  of  arms  which  some  nations  have  always  done  as  a 
custom  * — such  as  the  German  and  Swiss — but  I  detest  murder. 
This,  however,  does  not  always  come  through  the  sword,  but 
sometimes  by  spear  or  rock.  Therefore  you  will  have  mountains 
and  forests  removed,  for  out  of  these  weapons  are  obtained. 
One  man  dies  from  the  seed  of  a  raisin,  another  from  a  goat  hair 
in  a  glass  of  milk.  I  myself  saw  a  man  among  my  people  of  the 
Toggenburg  who  died  from  the  sting  of  a  single  bee.  Are  then 
grapes,  goats  and  bees  to  be  done  away  with?  But  I  know 
whither  this  also  points.  The  power  of  every  magistracy  is  par- 
ticularly hateful  to  them,  and  they  are  not  content  with  what  the 

•  In  Switzerland  it  was  the  custom  to  carry  side  arms  in  the  senate,  courts, 
popular  assembly,  and  even  at  baptisms.     (Edd.  Zwingli's  Works.) 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST^  TRICKS.  1 93 

apostle  commands  :  Fear  not  authority,  but  do  what  is  right  and 
'  lawful.  Not  applicable  to  the  magistracy  is  the  saying  of  Christ : 
Resist  not  evil,  nor  that  other ;  you  ought  not  to  rule.  This  has 
reference  to  apostles  and  bishops  and  each  private  individual, 
for  authority  is  of  God.  It  belongs  to  those  to  fear  legitimate 
authority  who  seek  the  confusion  of  all  things.  Hence  they  snarl 
out  I  don't  know  what  foolish  statements  all  the  time  about  laying 
down  arras.  Not  that  I  either  approve  or  assail  this  custom  of 
carrying  arms.  But  I  do  condemn  the  disposition  toward 
slaughter  beyond  all  mortals  so  thoroughly  that  nothing  do  I  hate 
more.*  I,  too,  teach  that  arms  are  to  be  laid  aside,  but  I  teach 
that  the  sword  is  to  be  drawn  by  which  they  may  be  struck  who 
have  done  injury,  those  be  relieved  who  have  suffered,  and  those 
praised  who  have  done  their  work  well. 

Catabaptists.  Fifth,  We  thus  determine  about  pastors  of  the 
church  of  God,  that  there  be  some  one  pastor  of  a  flock  according 
to  the  order  of  Paul  in  all  things',  who  shall  have  good  testimony 
from  those  who  are  outside  the  faith.  Let  it  be  his  duty  to  read, 
warn,  teach,  instruct,  exhort,  correct  or  communicate  in  the 
church,  and  to  preside  well  over  all  the  brethren  and  sisters,  as 
well  in  prayer  as  in  breaking  of  bread,  and  in  all  things  pertaining 
to  the  body  of  Christ  to  watch  that  it  may  be  supported  and 
increased,  that  the  name  of  God  be  cherished  through  us  and  be 
praised  and  the  mouth  shut  to  blasphemy.  But  support  ought 
to  be  supplied  him  from  the  church  which  elects  him,  if  he  lack. 
For  he  who  serves  the  gospel  should  live  by  the  gospel,  as  the 
Lord  ordained.  But  if  a  pastor  have  done  aught  worthy  of 
blame  or  correction,  action  should  not  be  taken  against  him  unless 
by  the  testimony  of  two  or  three  witnesses.  When  they  sin  they 
should  be  publicly  reproved,  that  the  others  may  fear.  But  if  a 
pastor  be  either  driven  out  or  be  led  by  the  cross  to  the  Lord 
another  should  succeed  him  at  once,  so  that  the  people  and  flock 

♦  He  refers  here  to  his  antipathy  to  the  foreign  military  service  of  the  Swiss, 
■which  he  assailed  and  condemned.     (Edd.  Zwingli's  Works.) 


194  ZWINGU   SELECTIONS. 

of  God  be  not  scattered,  but  receive  consolation  and  be  pre- 
served by  exhortation. 

Reply,  We  have  seen  in  a  former  paragraph  how  perplexingly 
and  confusingly,  captiously  and  obscurely  they  treated  of  separa- 
tion from  abominations,  for  their  cause  had  little  justice  in  it.. 
Here  we  see  how  clear  they  are  when  they  deal  with  their  church 
(it  is  wonderful,  the  effrontery  with  which  they  call  it  a  church) 
and  their  pastors.  There  they  were  after  this  one  thing — to- 
show  their  treachery  legitimate,  both  because  of  the  morals  of 
men  and  the  bishops,  and  they  were  torn  by  conflicting  emotions,, 
and,  as  is  said,  held  the  wolf  by  the  ears.  -  For  if  they  extrava- 
gantly blamed  the  morals  of  the  faithful  they  would  incur  the 
charge  of  evil  speaking  and  malevolence,  but  if  they  thought 
moderately  well  of  them,  those  whom  they  had  brought  over  to 
themselves  would  not  be  sufficiently  aroused  to  their  secession. 
So  since  they  dared  not  speak  freely,  both  because  of  fear  and 
caution  as  well  as  because  of  the  injustice  of  their  cause  and 
malice,  they  concluded  to  speak  obscurely  and  suspiciously,  so 
that  none  attacking  in  open  contest  might  easily  catch  the  oily 
and  chameleon-like  adversary.  For  when  you  were  going  to  say  : 
Why  do  you  encourage  secession  from  the  churches  of  the  faithfulr 
they  would  be  ready  to  reply  that  they  taught  only  separation  from 
the  evil,  and  that  legitimately.  When  you  objected  that  you  do 
not  denounce  separation  from  the  wicked,  but  that  they  seem  to 
speak  of  separation  from  those  whose  life  is  wholly  endurable, 
they  could  reply  by  heaping  up,  in  dramatic  forestalling  of  objec- 
tions, what  they  can  in  no  way  correctly  defend — the  world,  those 
out  of  the  world,  good  and  evil,  God  and  the  devil,  Christ  and 
Belial,  etc.  By  this  you  could  be  led  to  reason  thus  :  It  is  true 
what  they  say ;  all  things  known  are  either  divine  or  worldly,  and 
so  if  you  found  aught  worldly  in  yourself  you  would  condemn 
yourself,  even  if  you  should  have  commerce  with  worldly  matters^ 
and  so  being  aroused  would  go  over  to  the  betrayers,  not  reflect- 
ing that  when  you  had  gone  over  to  them  you  would  at  once  find 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 95 

human  misery  there,  too,  just  as  much  as  among  those  who  as 
citizens  do  as  the  law  directs,  meet  in  assembly,  attend  marriages 
and  public  feasts,  bear  arms  and  do  the  other  things  which  those 
men  blame  as  the  very  worst  possible.  Nay,  you  would  find 
worse  misery,  for  they  are  steeped  in  abominable  crimes — to  use 
their  own  vocabulary.  They  render  his  own  to  none,  they  defile 
wives,  fail  to  judge  parricide,  take  away  the  magistracy,  eliminate 
obedience.  But  I  return  to  the  proposition.  When  in  the  for- 
mer paragraph,  I  say,  they  encouraged  defection,  they  purposely 
said  everything  in  obscure  terms,  chiefly  for  the  reasons  I  have 
assigned.  But  how  plain  and  clear  are  they  when  they  speak  of 
the  pastor  of  their  own  church  !  They  concede,  then,  under  this 
rule  the  support  to  the  pastor  of  a  heretical  church  which  they 
deny  to  the  bishop  of  the  Christian  church.  Where  now  are 
those  words  :  "  They  eat  at  the  table  of  Jezebel ;  they  themselves 
devour  the  homes  of  widows,"  though  at  that  time  none  of  us 
had  more  than  seventy  gold  pieces,  and  we  all  said  that  it  is 
much  better  to  live  from  those  goods  which  were  first  among  the 
churches,  or  from  the  tithes  or  returns  that  might  be  collected, 
than,  leaving  those  to  I  know  not  whom,  weigh  down  the  churches 
by  a  new  begging  of  support.  But  thanks  be  to  God  the  leaders  * 
have  thoroughly  disclosed  themselves  here.  Now  they  mark  out 
support  for  the  bishop  of  their  own  church.  Where,  pray,  will 
they  get  it?  Do  you  not  cry  out  that  you  are  more  than  suffi- 
ciently burdened,  and  probably  with  justice,  under  the  innumer- 
able contributions,  taxes,  giving  and  other  exactions?  But  this  is 
sweet — what  they  add  in  the  marking  out  of  support :  If  a  pastor 
need  aught !  As  if  all  those  leaders  were  not  most  lost  vagrants, 
who  either  save  their  soul  with  their  feet  when  they  owe  anything 
or  are  so  slothful  and  idle  that  they  will  not  provide  support  by 
their  hands.  What  then  do  you  suppose  they  lack?  A  part  of 
support?     They  who  are  so  slothful  and  lazy  that  when  you  have 

*  Zwingli  calls  them  Coryphaei^  the  name  given  to  the  leaders  of  the  chorus 
in  the  Greek  drama. 


196  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

supplied  all  support  they  are  hardly  able  to  endure  the  labor  of 
living.  The  atrabilious  men  !  It  is  bile,  and  not  the  spirit,  for 
which  they  sell  themselves.  Do  we  not  know  that  it  is  from  bile 
and  an  evil  admixture  that  the  crazy  commit  suicide?  And  are 
we  ignorant  of  those  atrabilious  fellows  who  labor  with  their  own 
impatience,  and  shall  we  trust  their  lies  about  the  spirit?  I  know 
that  all  is  not  borne  along  of  its  own  will,  but  is  governed  and 
disposed  by  the  providence  of  God,  but  at  the  same  time  I  see 
also  that  by  his  providence  these  monsters  are  led  like  wild  boars 
into  our  hquid  pools  to  prove  us,  so  that  it  may  appear  whether 
we  are  faithful  or  not.  That  they  have  sewed  together  in  this 
article  of  theirs  a  patchwork  from  many  passages  of  Scripture — 
this  I  do  not  think  needs  exposition. 

Catabaptists.  Sixth.  We  determine  or  decide  about  the  sword 
as  follows  :  The  sword  is  an  ordinance  of  God  outside  of  the  per- 
fection of  Christ,  by  which  the  evil  man  is  punished  and  slain 
and  the  good  man  defended.  In  the  law  the  sword  is  ordained 
against  the  evil  for  punishment  and  death,  and  for  this  the 
magistracy  of  the  world  is  constituted.  But  in  the  perfection  of 
Christ  we  use  only  excommunication,  for  the  admonishing  and 
exclusion  of  the  sinner,  for  the  destruction  of  the  flesh  alone,  as 
admonishment  and  warning  that  he  sin  no  more.  Here  we  are 
asked  by  many  who  do  not  understand  the  will  of  Christ  toward 
us :  Can  a  Christian  use,  or  ought  he  to  use,  the  sword  against 
evil  for  the  defense  of  the  good  or  from  love?  This  reply  is 
therefore  revealed  to  us  unanimously :  Christ  teaches  us  to  learn 
from  himself.  But  he  is  mild  and  gentle  of  heart,  and  we  shall 
find  rest  to  our  souls.  So  Christ  said  to  the  woman  taken  in 
adultery,  not  that  she  should  be  stoned  according  to  the  law  (and 
yet  he  had  said  :  As  my  Father  hath  commanded  me,  so  I  speak), 
but  he  spoke  to  her  with  commiseration  and  indulgence  and 
warning  not  to  sin  again,  and  said :  Go  and  sin  no  more.  We 
must  in  the  same  way  observe  this  according  to  the  rule  of  ex- 
communication. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  197 

Reply,  I  will  not  interpret  the  whole  of  this  paragraph  in  its 
prolixity  at  once,  but  divide  it  into  parts,  and  confute  it  as 
briefly  as  possible.  Therefore  when  they  say  that  the  sword  is 
an  ordinance  of  God  outside  the  perfection  of  Christ,  etc.,  I 
would  know  to  what  they  refer  the  perfection  of  Christ,  to  the 
head  or  the  body,  /.  <?.,  do  they  mean  to  say  :  Christ  himself  is  so 
perfect  that  he  needs  no  sword  (/.  e.,  the  magistracy,)  to  chastise 
or  punish  himself,  or  do  they  mean  that  Christians  need  no  sword 
or  magistracy?  If  the  first,  I  assert  that  the  Lord  of  lords  and 
King  of  kings  is  so  far  from  needing  magistracy  that  all  magis- 
trates draw  their  authority  down  from  heaven  through  him.  If 
the  second,  I  strive  with  all  my  powers  against  the  proposition 
that  Christians  need  no  magistracy.  Fori  grant  this,  that  it  is 
easy  for  them  to  say  that  a  real  Christian  needs  no  magistracy, 
for  of  faith  he  omits  none  of  those  things  that  ought  to  be  done 
and  does  none  of  the  deeds  that  are  not  right.  But  it  is  our 
misfortune  that  among  men  we  do  not  find  so  absolute  perfec- 
tion, and  may  not  hope  to  find  that  all  who  confess  Christ  are 
wholly  happy,  as  long  as  we  bear  about  this  domicile  of  the  body. 
Therefore  the  saying :  The  sword  is  an  ordinance  of  God  outside 
of  the  perfection  of  Christ  is  true  in  this  sense — wherever  the 
members  of  Christ  do  not  arrive  at  the  measure  of  the  perfection 
of  the  head  there  is  need  for  the  sword.  But  they  mean  some- 
thing else  entirely,  /.  ^.,  that  the  heretical  church  of  the  re  bap- 
tized needs  no  sword,  for  it  is  within  the  perfection  of  Christ. 
For  the  foolish  men  assume  what  the  monks  used  to  assume,  viz., 
that  they  are  in  a  state  of  perfection,  although  they  do  not  use 
those  words.  For  when  they  separate  from  the  world,  crying  to 
brethren  of  the  same  kidney,  "  Go  ye  out  from  them,"  do  they 
do.  anything  but  guard  themselves  from  being  defiled  by  some 
filth  from  us?  Afterwards  when  they  say  :  But  in  the  perfection 
of  Christ  we  use  excommunication  only,  etc.,  you  see  how  they 
assert  that  they  have  perfection  within  their  church  when  they 
say :    We  use.     These  most  seditious  men  therefore  would  take 


198  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

away  the  sword  so  that  they  may  the  more  freely  throw  all  into 
confusion.  There  is  no  need  for  you  to  say  that  there  are  so 
many  impious  that  there  is  no  danger  of  taking  away  the  sword 
by  their  preaching.  For  they  do  not  go  to  the  impious.  But 
when  they  see  those  who  have  embraced  the  gospel — even  now 
so  great  a  number  that  if  they  should  undertake  to  do  what  those 
do  who  defend  the  pope  they  might  hope  to  come  off  superior — 
if  they  could  draw  these  to  their  faction,  all  magistracy  and  obli- 
gation will  be  abolished.  Well  known  is  the  cry  of  that  Catabap- 
tist  when  he  returned  to  Christ :  If  we  had  been  as  superior  to 
you  as  you  were  to  us,  you  would  have  seen  whether  we  had 
swords  and  oath  or  not.  And  when  they  would  free  us  from  all 
fear,  and  promise  that  all  will  come  out  as  we  desire  it,  whither, 
pray,  do  they  look,  if  not  to  the  multitude,  for  when  they  have 
gained  this  they  will  sail  into  port?  They  consequently  desire  to 
cajole  those  who  have  received  the  gospel  to  lay  aside  the 
sword.  For  among  them  the  authority  of  the  word  is  valid.  If 
you  repeat  six  hundred  times  the  words  of  Christ  to  others,  the 
tyrants  and  the  impious  popes,  they  are  not  all  disturbed.  In 
the  perfection  of  Christ,  viz.,  in  their  evil  church,  they  would 
have  the  sword  removed,  so  that  they  might  more  freely  associate 
with  harlots,  defile  matrons,  seduce  with  their  blandiloquence  the 
women,  confuse  all  settled  conditions,  nay,  overthrow  cities  and 
men's  dwelling  places.  For  thus  a  little  band  of  robbers  will  be 
able  to  compel  the  making  common  the  goods  of  those  who  are 
unwilling  to  put  them  to  common  use.  So  that  the  more  the 
sword  ought  to  be  preserved  even  on  their  own  account,  since 
they  assail  with  so  many  stratagems  the  public  peace,  the  more 
they  deny  that  it  can  be  employed  among  Christians.  When 
therefore  they  lead  us  to  Christ,  who  offered  himself  as  an  example 
to  us  of  gentleness  and  humility,  they  wish  to  appear  to  have 
done  right ;  indeed  they  would  in  our  judgment  also  have  done 
right  if  faith  were  with  them.  For  if  it  were,  they  would  con- 
tinue to  be  mild  and  of  humble  spirit,  even  though  none  followed 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  1 99 

them,  but  now  since  there  is  nothing  bitterer  or  more  harsh 
{than  they],  it  becomes  evident  that  gentleness  is  taught  by  them 
just  as  we  have  heard  that  temperance  was  taught  once  by  a 
most  eager  glutton.  For  when  any  edible  was  brought  in  of 
which  he  was  particularly  fond,  he  used  to  warn  his  table-com- 
panions not  to  swallow  it  hurriedly  and  hastily^  but  quietly  to 
dwell  upon  it  and  to  masticate  it  for  a  long  time,  and  so  increase 
the  pleasure  by  lengthening  it,  in  order  that  he  might  gorge  him- 
self the  more  abundantly.  So  since  there  is  nothing  harsher 
than  these  (for  what  age  has  ever  seen  such  evil  speaking?) 
they  refer  others  to  Christ  to  learn  gentleness,  while  they  them- 
selves go  as  far  from  his  example  as  possible.  Then  they  adduce 
the  example  of  Christ  when  he  dealt  with  the  woman  adulterer, 
/.  e.y  he  did  not  hand  her  over  to  be  stoned,  but  regarded  her 
with  compassion,  and  said  :  Go  and  sin  no  more.  Indeed  they 
write  all  this  charmingly,  so  that  you  may  the  more  easily  under- 
stand that  those  spirits  are  even^  now  propitious  to  adulterers. 
But  look  here,  you  slothful  and  over-sensitive  fellows,  have  you 
not  read  that  Christ  gave  all  sorts  of  precedents  in  accordance 
with  the  diversity  of  occasions?  How  often  do  you  read  the 
most  cruel  things?  Here  then  learn  to  recognize  a  divine  and 
punishing  justice.  How  often,  on  the  contrary,  do  you  read  the 
most  gentle?  There  recognize  pity.  Then  in  a  word  learn  this, 
that  he  whose  first  coming  had  nothing  harsh  in  it,  with  that 
same  one  there  is  also  the  most  complete  justice,  but  since  in 
that  first  coming  his  purpose  was  not  to  judge  or  condemn,  but 
to  save,  he  preserved  the  limits  of  his  mission.  Unless  you  show 
me  that  somewhere  during  that  advent  he  assumed  the  authority 
of  a  judge,  you  will  never  move  me  by  that  example  [to  believe] 
that  the  magistracy  is  not  lawful  for  a  Christian.  This  you 
cannot  do,  for  he  fled  when  once  they  wished  to  make  him  king. 
But  now  that  that  mission  has  been  completed,  and  he  has  sat 
down  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  see  whether  or  not  he  has  de- 
stroyed cruel  murderers  and  given  his  vineyard  to  other  workers. 


200  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

It  is  no  strange  thing  that  so  many  sects  are  born  daily ;  it  is 
wonderful  that  more  are  not  produced,  especially  when  we  have 
so  wise  interpreters  of  Scripture  that  they  do  not  yet  discrimi- 
nate between  Christ's  omnipotence,  providence  and  divinity,  by 
which  he  ever  governs  all,  and  his  mission  which  he  performed 
here.  For  when  they  behold  that  which  he  did  in  accordance 
with  his  mission  here  immediately  they  found  upon  those  laws» 
Here  he  did  not  take  upon  himself  the  functions  of  a  judge,  for 
he  did  not  come  for  that.  Let  no  one  therefore  be  judge.  By 
no  means.     For  that  is  to  confound  divine  and  human  law. 

Catabaptists.  Secondly,  the  question  is  asked  about  the  sword, 
whether  a  Christian  may  pronounce  or  give  judgment  in  secular 
matters,  between  force  and  force,  strife  and  strife,  in  which  the 
unfaithful  differ.  To  which  we  reply  :  Christ  would  not  decide 
between  brethren  who  quarreled  about  a  bequest,  but  drove  them 
away.     Consequently  we  must  do  likewise. 

Reply.  I  think  it  is  clear  enough  why  Christ  put  away  this 
case ;  he  had  not  come  to  prepare  a  kingdom  for  himself  in  this 
world,  but  that  he  who  was  Lord  of  all  might  subject  himself  to 
all.  And  I  assert  that  the  words  of  the  Saviour  prove  this.  For 
who,  said  he,  made  me  a  judge  and  a  divider  over  you?  Behold 
how  he  rejected  the  office  of  a  judge  !  For  although  Christ  was 
lord  of  all,  yet  in  the  dispensation  of  his  humanity  he  never  pro- 
claimed himself  king.  When  then  he  denies  that  he  is  a  judge, 
he  denies  that  this  case  concerns  him ;  but  meanwhile,  when  the 
occasion  offers,  does  he  not  discuss  the  rendering  to  each  of  his 
own? — something  that  he  almost  never  omits.  If  ever  a  reason 
is  given  for  discussing  necessary  matters,  he  always  passes  from 
the  gross  to  the  spiritual.  But  here  in  passing  by  this  he  openly 
teaches  that  there  was  some  judge  to  whom  they  could  refer  the 
case,  but  Christ  was  not  he,  so  he  made  no  decision.  Therefore 
we  see  the  office  of  judge  rather  confirmed  than  done  away,  even 
among  the  devout.  So  Paul's  admonition  to  bear  injury  rather 
than  litigate  with  a  brother  does  not  involve  that  a  Christian  may 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  20I 

not  be  a  judge ;  it  urges  us  not  to  be  litigious.  So  also  Christ 
warned  against  lawsuits  because  of  the  danger,  since  it  often 
occurred  in  fact  that  he  who  hoped  to  return  from  the  court  a 
jviniier  was  thrown  into  prison  till  he  could  pay  the  whole  debt. 
But  this  is  excessively  Christian  when  they  say :  In  the  lawsuits 
which  the  unbelieving  engage  in — meaning  by  the  unbelieving  all 
who  are  not  of  their  heretical  church.  For  they  assert  that  si 
Christian  may  not  exercise  the  office  of  judge  in  external  matters 
— yet  this  is  a  divine  matter  if  rightly  performed.  While  they 
arrogate  to  themselves  the  judgment  of  the  inner  man  (for  they 
call  all  unbelieving  who  of  a  whole  heart  cherish  the  true  God 
and  the  one  Jesus  Christ,  provided  these  do  not  follow  their 
erring  flock).  And  they  do  this  open^y.  For  often  two  of 
them  pass  by  good  and  devout  men  and  one  of  them,  the  other 
being  left  to  go  on,  stops  to  chat  with  our  people ;  then  the  one 
who  has  gone  on,  turning  about,  cries  out  to  the  other :  Brother,, 
what  are  you  doing  among  the  unbelievers?  Go  away  from 
them  !  Gentle  men,  indeed,  who  occasion  some  damage  as  ofteii 
as  opportunity  permits  !  Which  class  seems  to  you,  reader,  to  be 
the  gentler  and  more  humble — they  who  think  nothing  but  vio- 
lence and  injury  or  those  who  overcome  all  audacity  by  sweetness?/ 
Catabaptists.  Third,  about  the  sword  it  is  asked  whether  a 
Christian  ought  to  hold  office  when  it  is  appointed  to  him.  We 
reply  that  Christ  was  about  to  be  made  king,  yet  he  fled  and 
did  not  look  back,  according  to  the  ordinance  of  his  Father. 
So  ought  we  to  do,  i,  e.^  follow  him,  and  we  shall  not  walk  in  the 
darkness.  For  he  said  also :  He  that  would  follow  me  must 
deny  himself  and  take  up  his  cross  and  follow  me.  He  even 
interdicted  the  power  of  the  sword,  and  thus  denounced  it :  The 
kings  of  the  Gentiles  rule,  but  ye  are  not  such.  So  Paul  says : 
Whom  God  foreknew  he  also  predestinated  to  be  conformed  to 
the  image  of  his  Son.  Peter  also  said  that  he  had  suffered,  not 
ruled,  and  left  us  an  example  that  we  might  follow  in  his  foot- 
steps. 

14 


202  'ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

Reply.  That  Christ  would  have  been  king  if  he  had  not  fled 
has  been  discussed  above.  For  he  came  not  to  be  tended  and 
ministered  to  as  tyrants  are,  but  to  minister;  not  to  give  the 
whole  world  for  the  redemption  of  his  own  skin,  as  you  Cata« 
baptists  do,  betraying  all  your  brethren  when  peril  threatens,  but 
to  give  his  life  for  all  mankind.  He  came  for  this,  I  say.  Yet 
he  never  forbade  a  Christian  and  one  worthy  of  empire  to  become 
a  king  even.  "  Who  would  follow  me  must  deny  himself  and 
take  up  his  cross  and  follow  me  " — this  was  not  said  by  him  to 
indicate  that  no  one  could  take  office  because  he  did  not. 
For  many  kings  have  despised  themselves  and  followed  him, 
though  retaining  their  royal  authority  until  the  end.  If  Saul  had 
done  this  he  would  not  have  rendered  the  mountains  of  Gilboa 
illustrious  by  his  calamity.  "  The  kings  of  the  Gentiles  exercise 
authority  over  them,  but  ye  are  not  so,"  was  not  said  to  interdict 
from  the  magistracy.  We  ought  to  consider  the  occasion  by 
which  he  was  led  to  express  this  sentiment.  The  apostles  had 
been  contending  about  the  leadership.  Let  us  then  recognize 
that  it  was  said  to  them.  For  as  he  had  come  not  to  rule,  but 
to  redeem,  so  also  he  sent  the  disciples :  As  the  Father,  he  said, 
hath  sent  me,  so  I  also  send  you,  /.  ^.,  to  preach,  not  to  rule. 
So  since  the  apostles  acted  in  Christ's  place,  they  ought  to  restrain 
their  desires  to  rule  after  the  pattern  of  their  archetype  Christ. 
He  commanded  them  therefore  not  to  rule ;  nay,  to  each  private 
individual  he  implied  that  he  should  not  put  himself  forward.  I 
will  prove  this  by  the  testimony  of  the  apostles  themselves. 
Peter  ordered  slaves  to  obey  their  masters,  not  only  good  and 
humane  ones,  but  even  the  perverted.  Behold  how  he  opposes 
the  perverse  to  good  and  humane  !  He  means  by  the  good 
those  who  were  faithful;  by  the  perverse,  not  the  harsh  and 
unkind,  but  those  not  in  the  faith.  Therefore  there  were  faithful 
masters.  Peter  also  baptized  Cornelius  the  centurion.  The  high 
functionary  of  the  Ethiopian  Candace  was  baptized  by  Philip. 
But  if,  according  to  your  opinion,  a  Christian  may  not  exercise 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  203 

the  magistracy,  and  penitence  and  confession  of  faith  are  required 
^before  being  baptized,  then  Peter  and  Philip  did  wrong  in  bap- 
tizing these  before  they  had  resigned  office,  or  a  Gentile  who  has 
been  placed  in  office  may  also  be  baptized  and  received  into  the 
church.  But  in  Paul  we  find  mention  of  a  Christian  Quaestor  and 
faithful  master.  For  in  writing  to  the  Ephesians  he  says  :  Slaves 
who  have  faithful  masters.  And  to  the  powerful  of  the  Colossians 
he  writes  that  they  should  act  justly  to  the  slaves  whom  they  possess, 
I  pass  by  Sergius  Paulus.  Now  neither  Peter  nor  Paul  in  writing 
to  magistrates  and  masters  discourage  them  from  mastership. 
But  when  they  write  to  the  bishops,  how  often,  pray,  do  they 
advise  not  to  compass  lordship  in  their  duty,  /.  e.,  in  the  inherit- 
ance of  the  Lord,  not  to  circumvent  the  brethren  or  throw  a 
snare  or  be  violent  or  the  like  !  Clear,  therefore,  is  the  word  of 
Christ :  Ye  are  not  such.  Even  the  apostles  understood  it  only 
as  directed  to  themselves.  What  these  cite  from  Paul  respecting 
conformity  to  the  image  of  Christ  applies  equally  to  kings  and 
beggars ;  nay,  they  are  more  conformed  to  the  image  of  the  Son 
of  God  who  in  the  height  of  power  place  themselves  among  the 
lowest,  as  did  the  Son  of  God,  than  we  who  creep  upon  the 
ground.  Peter,  they  say,  asserted  that  he  had  suffered,  not  ruled. 
He  did  that  for  which  he  was  sent,  as  has  been  said  often  enough. 
Catabaptists.  Finally  we  learn  that  a  Christian  may  not  be  a 
magistrate  from  what  follows.  The  magistracy  is  a  carnal  office, 
a  Christian  is  spiritual.  Magistrates'  home  and  dwelling  are  cor- 
poreal in  this  world,  all  Christians'  are  in  heaven.  The  first  are 
citizens  of  this  world.  Christians  of  heaven.  The  arms  of  the 
former  are  carnal  and  against  the  flesh ;  of  the  latter,  spiritual 
and  against  the  machinations  of  the  devil.  Earthly  magistrates 
employ  brass  and  iron,  but  Christians  put  on  the  armor  of  God — 
truth,  righteousness,  peace,  faith,  salvation  and  the  word  of  God. 
In  short,  just  as  our  head  is  disposed  toward  us,  so  ought  all  the 
members  of  the  body  in  their  entirety  to  be  disposed  through 
him,  that  there  be  no  strife  in  the  body  to  destroy  it.     For  every 


204  ZWINGLI    SELECriONS. 

kingdom  divided  against  itself  perishes.  Since  therefore  Christ 
is  as  he  is  described,  the  members  must  necessarily  be  such  that 
the  body  may  remain  sound  and  whole,  to  its  own  preservation 
and  upbuilding. 

Reply.  You  stupid  seducers,  for  what  more  appropriate  words 
can  I  apply  to  them  ?  The  magistrates'  office  is  carnal,  say  they. 
They  might  say  at  least  that  their  power  is  directed  toward  the 
carnal  and  external.  For  are  those  things  carnal  that  are  men- 
tioned in  Ex.  xviii.  21  :  Provide  out  of  all  the  people  able  men, 
such  as  fear  God,  men  of  truth,  who  hate  covetousness.  There- 
fore a  judge  ought  above  all  men  to  be  rightly  affected  to  all  and 
unwavering,  giving  no  decision  in  partiality  or  hatred  or  fear  or 
violence.  But  who  can  better  do  this  than  a  most  devout  per- 
son? But  because  he  has  to  do  with  those  who  do  whatever 
they  please,  according  to  the  impulse  of  the  flesh,  does  not  make 
him  less  spiritual  than  those  who  think  themselves  so  mightily  so. 
It  actually  occurs  that  a  father  has  to  judge  his  son,  as  occurred 
to  Saul,  Brutus,  Manlius  and  others.  In  such  cases  what  are  we 
to  think  a  judge  has  most  need  of?  Firmness,  surely.  But  the 
flesh  does  not  supply  that,  but  either  desire  for  glory  or  conten- 
tion, and  then  it  is  not  firmness,  but  persistency — such  as  that 
livid  kind  of  yours — or  from  love  of  righteousness,  which  can 
be  from  God  alone.  A  judge  of  this  sort  is  more  spiritual  than 
those  gentle  little  fellows  who  preach  to  us  a  kind  of  womanish 
gentleness,  especially  since  there  is  so  much  evil  among  mortals. 
A  judge  of  this  sort  is  of  more  advantage  to  the  glory  of  God  and 
the  advancement  of  the  pubhc  peace  than  the  whole  Catabaptist 
heresy,  though  it  should  include  its  thousands  of  thousands. 
Consequently  a  judge  or  magistrate  ought  particularly  to  be  a 
Christian  and  a  spiritually-minded  man.  So  God  himself  deigned 
to  call  them  by  his  own  name  Elohim,  because  they  should  be  most 
like  God  as  high  priests  of  righteousness,  equity  and  firmness. 
"Their  home"  (/.  ^.,  judges')  "and  habitation  are  corporeal  and 
in  this  world;    Christians'  are  in   heaven."     As  if   those  words 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  205 

sounded  to  us  of  heaven  !  Where  are  you,  pray,  when  you  say 
'these  things?  In  the  world,  I  think!  So  you,  too,  are  in  this 
world.  If  then  a  Christian  may  not  be  a  magistrate  because  his 
habitation  is  in  this  world,  then  you  are  not  Christians,  for  you 
are  in. the  world.  But  how  is  a  Christian's  habitation  in  heaven? 
In  that  he  lives  there  in  contemplation  and  moves  thither  in 
possession  and  in  fruition,  no  doubt.*  Therefore  a  judge,  since 
he  is  ever  engaged  in  contemplation  of  God,  since  he  is  every 
moment  considering  the  safety  of  the  people  under  him  and  the 
rendering  of  exact  justice  to  each,  is  he  not  in  heaven,  so  far  as 
contemplation  is  concerned,  rather  than  all  the  Catabaptists,  who, 
if  they  honored  God,  would  not  engage  in  counsels  so  fooHsh  and 
audacious.  Finally,  a  judge  who  fears  God  will  ascend  after  this 
life  unto  him  whose  name  and  office  he  bears  heie,  when  those 
seducers  will  all  be  sunk  in  the  depth  of  their  own  evil  baptism. 
Here  meanwhile,  magistrates  and  judges,  be  ye  mindful  of  your 
duties,  for  not  otherwise  is  horror  of  you  conceived  than  because 
those  who  render  right  to  every  one  are  so  rare  among  you, 
especially  in  this  time  when  all  abounds  in  violence  and  cruelty. 
But  I  have  not  time  to  pursue  this  here.  After  this  manner  I 
reply  to  their  grandiloquent  words — the  citizenship  of  these  is  in 
this  world,  of  Christians,  in  heaven.  For  the  Catabaptists  thus 
far  have  no  citizenship  here,  no  church  in  which  they  may  live 
and  watch,  as  a  bishop  and  pastor  should,  but  they  are  like  wolves 
that  lie  in  wait  in  the  forests,  that  seize  the  prey  and  flee,  that 
burn  and  then  escape.  The  arms  of  these  are  carnal  and  against 
the  flesh,  they  say,  but  Christians'  are  spiritual  and  against  the 
forts  of  the  devil.  They  do  not  need  me  as  a  teacher  here,  for 
we  see  clearly  enough  that  their  wars  are  not  against  the  flesh, 
for  in  all  they  yield  to  it.  So  earthly  magistrates,  they  say,  are 
armed  with  brass  and  iron ;  Catabaptists  with  hypocrisy  and  evil 
speaking,  lies,  injury,  discord,  faithlessness,  disaster  and  the  word 
of  the  devil — to  give  them  altogether  the  gifts  that  are  theirs  in 

*  /.  e.,  transfers  his  real  possessions  and  interests  thither. 


206  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

place  of  what  they  claim  for  themselves.  "  We  ought  in  all  to 
imitate  Christ" — who  denies  it?  But  what  prevents  a  pious 
judge  from  being,  through  the  goodness  and  grace  of  God,  as 
like  Christ  as  is  a  Catabaptist?  Rather,  as  I  have  said,  he  is 
the  more  able  as  he  is  the  more  like  him,  since  when  he  was 
placed  aloft  he  thought  of  humble  things.  But  the  Catabaptist 
ever  assumes  the  highest  in  his  own  impudence.  And  the  king- 
dom of  Christ  is  not  divided  when  a  Christian  exercises  the 
magistracy ;  it  is  built  up  and  united.  This  is  clear  from  one 
example  of  Scripture,  many  times  repeated,  where  cohorts  of 
slaves  are  said  to  have  embraced  the  faith  of  their  masters.  And 
it  has  been  repeated  by  many  cities  in  these  times  of  ours,  for 
as  soon  as  the  gospel  began  to  be  preached  they  gave  opportunity 
to  hear  it  to  the  people  entrusted  to  them  by  the  Lord,  just  as 
when  faithful  Jehosaphat  ordered  the  law  to  be  expounded  by  the 
priests  and  Levites,  supported  by  several  cohorts,  throughout  all 
his  dominions.  They  opened  a  door  by  public  command  to  the 
gospel  and  its  ministers.  And  they  have  shut  the  door  upon  the 
wolves  and  false  apostles,  whether  they  have  proceeded  from  the 
court  of  the  pope  or  from  the  dens  and  caves  of  the  Catabaptists. 
By  this  deed,  glory  to  God,  great  growth  of  the  gospel  has  at 
once  been  seen.  But,  as  I  have  said,  among  the  Christians  they 
keep  agitating  these  perverse  teachings  about  not  exercising  the 
magistracy  or  taking  the  oath,  so  that  if  possible  they  may  sow 
their  errors  without  punishment  or  fear. 

Catabaptists.  Seventh.  We  thus  decide  and  determine  con- 
cerning the  oath  :  i.  An  oath  is  a  confirmation  among  those  who 
litigate  or  make  promises.  And  the  law  directs,  2,  that  it  be 
done  by  the  name  of  God  alone  truly,  and  not  falsely.  But 
Christ,  who  teaches  the  perfection  of  the  law,  forbids  all  oaths, 
whether  true  or  false,  whether  by  heaven  or  earth  or  Jerusalem 
or  oneself.  And  this  for  the  reason  which  he  adds,  sayings  3  : 
For  ye  cannot  make  one  hair  white  or  black.  So  notice  !  All 
swearing  is  prohibited  because  we  are  unable  to  perform  any  of 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST ,  TRICKS.  207 

those  things  we  promise  with  an  oath,  for  the  very  least  of  our 
possessions  we  cannot  change.  But  some  do  not  beheve  the 
simple  precepts  of  God,  saying,  4  :  Since  God  swore  to  Abraham 
by  himself  who  was  God,  at  the  time  when  he  promised  to  be 
kind  to  him  and  to  be  his  God,  if  only  he  kept  his  precepts,  why 
may  I  not  also  swear  when  I  make  a  promise  to  any  one?  We 
reply :  Hear  what  Scripture  says — when  God  wished  to  offer  a 
promise  to  his  heirs,  with  surety  that  his  counsel  would  not 
change,  he  interposed  an  oath,  that  we  might  hope  Listen  to 
the  import  of  this  Scripture :  God  has  the  power  of  taking  an 
oath,  which  he  prohibits  to  you,  for  to  him  all  things  are  possible. 
God  gave  an  oath  to  Abraham,  says  Scripture,  to  show  that  his 
counsel  would  not  change,  that  is,  since  no  one  could  resist  his 
power,  so  it  was  necessary  that  he  should  preserve  his  oath.  But 
we  cannot,  as  was  shown  above  by  the  word  of  Christ,  keep  an 
oath  or  do  what  we  have  sworn  to  do,  so  we  ought  not  to  swear. 
Again  some  say  that  it  is  in  the  Old  Testament,  not  in  the  New, 
that  we  are  forbidden  to  swear  by  God ;  in  the  New  it  is  for- 
bidden to  swear  by  heaven  or  earth  or  Jerusalem.  To  which  we 
reply :  Hear  the  Scripture,  5  :  Who  sweareth  by  the  temple  or 
heaven  sweareth  by  the  throne  of  God  and  by  him  who  sitteth 
therein.  You  see  how  to  swear  by  heaven  is  forbidden,  for  it  is 
the  throne  of  God ;  how  much  more  serious  to  swear  by  God 
himself  !  O  blind  and  foolish,  which  is  the  greater,  the  throne 
or  he  that  sitteth  thereon?  Some  even  dare  say:  If  it  is  wrong 
to  swear  even  when  the  Lord's  name  is  used  to  support  the  truth, 
then  Peter  and  Paul  sinned,  for  they  swore.  To  this  we  reply,  6  : 
Peter  and  Paul  only  testify  to  this,  that  by  God  himself  a  promise 
was  made  to  Abraham  by  an  oath,  but  they  themselves  make  no 
promises,  as  the  examples  clearly  reveal.  For  testifying  and 
swearing  are  entirely  distinct.  When  an  oath  is  taken  something 
is  promised  for  the  future.  7.  To  Abraham  when  an  old  man 
Christ  was  promised,  whom  we  received  after  a  long  interval. 
But  when  one  testifies  he  testifies  to  something  present,  whether 


2o8  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

it  is  true  and  good  or  not.  Just  as  Simeon  said  to  Mary  about 
Christ  and  testified  :  Lo,  this  one  is  set  for  the  fall  and  rising 
again  of  many  in  Israel,  and  for  a  sign  to  be  spoken  against. 
After  this  manner  Christ  taught  us  when  he  said  :  Let  your  speech 
be  yea,  yea,  and  nay,  nay,  for  whatsoever  is  added  to  this  is  of 
evil.  Christ  warns  us  thus :  Your  speech  ought  to  be  yea,  yea, 
that  we  may  not  understand  him  as  permitting  an  oath.  Christ 
is  simply  yea  and  nay.  And  all  who  seek  him  simply  shall  find 
him  the  Amen. 

Reply.  So  far  you  have  discussed  what  you  decided  about  the 
oath.  I  will  then  reply  to  each  error  in  order  by  its  number, 
to  avoid  eternal  repetition  of  your  remarks,  i.  Who,  pray,  has 
given  you  this  definition  of  an  oath?  You  have  indeed  touched 
on  the  practice  but  the  essential  nature  of  an  oath  you  either  do 
not  know  or  maliciously  pass  by.  You  tell  only  what  an  oath 
we  use,  but  what  it  is  or  how  taken  you  say  nothing  of.  If  you" 
should  tell  this  frankly,  an  oath  would  cause  no  great  dread  in 
men,  but  this  would  not  suit  your  designs,  for  you  wish  to  destroy 
the  magistracy  and  the  power  of  which  it  consists.  Take  away 
the  oath  and  you  have  dissolved  all  order.  The  burgomaster 
summons  a  senator  who  does  not  obey.  You  say  :  Let  him  have 
the  policeman  arrest  him.  How  will  he  obey?  The  burgomaster 
sees  a  Catabaptist  inciting  the  people  to  rebellion,  and,  wishing 
to  see  that  no  evil  befalls  the  state,  he  orders  him  not  to  teach 
in  secret  (for  they  who  are  on  the  side  of  the  gospel  in  sincerity 
easily  overcome  him  when  he  leaches  openly).  Or  he  forbids 
him  to  teach  publicly  or  privately,  and  orders  the  Catabaptist  to 
be  arrested  when  he  despises  every  order.  But  the  policeman 
does  not  obey.  Who  will  arrest  [the  Catabaptist] — the  burgo- 
master? But  the  other  is  stronger.  You  see,  good  reader,  all 
order  is  overthrown  when  the  oath  is  done  away.  Still,  if  the 
Scriptures  required  this,  I  would  not  oppose,  for  he  by  whose  pro- 
vidence all  is  governed  will  never  fail  the  house  of  Israel.  But 
he  wills  not  this  confusion.     Give  up  the  oath  in  any  state  then 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  209 

according  to  the  Catabaptists'  desire,  and  at  once  the  magistracy- 
's removed  and  all  things  follow  as  they  would  have  them.  Good 
gods  !  What  a  confusion  and  upturning  of  everything  !  For  no 
one  is  so  destitute  of  all  wisdom  in  an  emergency  as  this  class  of 
men.  They  would  have  everything  rectified  by  their  shouts, 
just  Hke  that  physician,  or  rather  quack,  who  runs  to  his  single 
cureall  for  every  sickness.  But,  to  come  to  the  point,  an  oath  is 
an  appeal  to  God  in  deciding  or  vouching  for  something.  This 
is  not  our  definition,  but  his  through  whom  we  swear,  Ex.  xxii. 
10  thus  commands :  If  a  man  deliver  unto  his  neighbor  an  ass  or 
an  ox  or  a  sheep  or  any  beast  to  keep,  and  it  die  or  be  hurt  or 
driven  away  by  robbers,  no  one  seeing  it,  then  shall  an  oath  of 
the  Lord  be  between  them  both,  that  he  with  whom  it  was  left 
hath  not  put  his  hand  to  his  neighbor's  goods,  and  the  owner  of 
the  beast  shall  accept  the  oath,  and  he  with  whom  it  was  left 
shall  not  restore  aught.  Here  you  see  an  oath  is  an  appeal  to 
God,  for  it  says  :  An  oath  of  the  Lord  (or  of  God),  for  the  word 
is  ^1^^  [Vahweh.]  But  this  appeal  i  s  nothing  but  a  vowing  of 
himself  to  the  extreme  punishment  of  the  divine  wrath  if  he  is 
wrong.  For  since  he  calls  as  witness  him,  of  whom  alone  he 
confesses  himself  to  be  a  worshiper,  and  [of  him]  who  can  by  no 
means  be  deceived,  though  man  may,  he  bears  witness  under 
penalty  of  losing  him  whom  alone  he  worships  and  who  alone 
knows  the  hearts  of  men,  that  he  is  not  deceiving  and  will  not 
deceive.  This  authority  of  Exodus  deals  with  the  deciding 
[judicial]  character  of  the  oath.  In  Gen.  xxi.  23  we  have  the 
words  of  Abimelech  to  Abraham,  as  follows :  Therefore  swear 
unto  me  by  God  that  thou  wilt  not  harm  me  nor  my  posterity, 
etc.  And  afterward  Abraham  says :  I  will  swear ;  and  again : 
There  they  both  sware.  Here  again  we  have  an  attestation  by 
God  to  do  something.  For  Abraham  swore  to  do  no  harm, 
which  oath  he  kept.  This,  I  say,  is  an  oath  when  you  define  it. 
The  Catabaptists  call  it  a  "  decision,"  and  omit  the  appeal  to 
God,  that  the  simple  may  not  reason  thus  among   themselves. 


2IO  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

How  is  it  that  God  is  not  to  be  invoked  when  the  safety  of  a 
neighbor  is  in  danger?  An  oath  is  therefore  a  divine  thing,  a 
sacred  anchor  to  which  we  flee  when  human  wisdom  can  go  no 
farther.  For  who  knows  what  is  in  man  except  God  alone?  He 
therefore  betrays  him  who  swears  falsely  by  him.  For  a  man 
is  believed  for  the  faith  and  religious  trust  which  he  has  in  God 
to  have  spoken  [truly]  and  to  be  ready  to  fulfill.  And  it  is  through 
him  that  he  deceives.  For  the  benefit,  then,  of  one's  neighbor 
an  oath  is  commanded  by  God.  And  since  the  whole  law  and 
the  prophets  hang  upon  these  two  commands :  Thou  shalt  love 
the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart  and  all  thy  soul  and  all  thy 
mind,  and  thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself,  then  the  oath 
itielf  is  an  appeal  to  God,  whom  you  uniquely  love  and  serve, 
and  is  for  the  advantage  of  the  neighbor.  Who  then  will  dare 
against  all  the  authority  of  Scripture  to  deprive  the  people  of  God 
of  the  oath?  God  cannot  be  offended  by  an  oath,  for  he  is- 
called  as  a  witness,  so  that  if  we  are  not  believed  yet  we  may  be 
believed,  since  we  will  on  no  account  betray  him.  For  all  will 
be  praised  who  shall  swear  by  him.  And  the  neighbor  also  wilt 
not  be  hurt,  for  the  oath  is  given  for  his  advantage,  that  he  may 
either  know  that  to  be  true  which  he  did  not  know,  or  may  be 
sure  that  what  he  deprecates  will  not  be  done  by  his  neighbor  or 
what  he  asks  will  be  granted.  So  far  from  a  devout  man  not 
being  able  to  take  an  oath,  he  will  be  impious  who  refuses  when 
a  matter  worthy  this  attestation  demands. 

But  the  whole  source  of  the  error  arises  from  their  not  seeing 
the  opinion  of  Christ  in  Matt.  v.  33  ;  indeed  they  do  not  know 
the  very  words.  For  the  German  word  "  schworen,"  to  which  they 
suppose  the  Greek  emopKeiv,  the  Latin  "  jurare  "  is  similar,  has 
another  signification  than  what  they  suppose.  For  when  we  say 
in  German  "  Der  schwort,"  /.  e.,  he  swears,  it  is  uncertain  whether 
a  formal  oath  is  referred  to  or  whether  one  is  just  swearing  off- 
hand. The  signification  of  this  word  is  twofold.  The  Latin  "  jurare" 
is  always  used  in  a  good  sense, ;.  ^.,  for  asking  a  sacred  obligation^ 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST    TRICKS.  21  t 

But  "dejerare"  is  used  for  swearing,  either  truly  or  falsely,  outside  of 
sacred  obligations,  which  we  might  translate  into  German  by  a  new 
word,  "  zuschworen,"  equivalent  to  the  Greek  word  einopKeiv.  So  the 
Latin  has  three  words,  "  jurare,"  "  dejerare  "  and  "  perjerare ;"  the 
first  means  a  sacred  obligation,  the  second  to  swear  off-hand  to 
anything  either  falsely  or  truly,  the  third  to  swear  falsely.  Christ 
would  not  forbid  us  to  swear  [*'  jurare  "],  but  to  swear  lightly  or  off- 
hand ["  dejerare  "].  But  as  these  men  do  not,  or  will  not,  see  this 
(I  have  often  set  it  forth  to  them),  they  willingly  and  wittingly 
stumble.  But  to  show  this  is  the  sense  of  Christ's  words  I  will 
examine  the  words  themselves,  as  follows :  Ye  have  heard  that 
it  was  said  by  them  of  old,  Thou  shalt  not  kniopnE'iv^  i.  <?., 
*'  dejerare,"  or  swear  lightly.  Our  translation  has  it,  "Thou  shalt 
not  commit  perjury,"  which  is  not  wholly  bad.  For  the  word 
"perjerare,"  though  never  used  in  a  good  sense,  does  not  always 
indicate  the  violation  or  transgression  or  pretended  fulfilment  of 
an  oath,  but  sometimes  it  means"  dejerare,"  when  "dejerare" 
is  used  in  a  bad  sense.  For  "  dejerare  "  is  sometimes  used  in  a 
good  sense,  as  I  have  sometimes  observed.  While  therefore  the 
words  of  Christ  are  :  It  was  said  by  them  of  old,  Thou  shalt  not 
commit  perjury,  you  will  nowhere  find  among  the  Hebrews  this 
interdict  of  perjury,  nor  among  the  Greeks.  But  you  will  find 
in  Ex.  XX.  7  :  Thou  shalt  not  take  the  name  of  the  Lord  thy 
God  "  temere,"  which  our  translator  translates  "  in  vain."  You 
will  find.  Lev.  xix.  1 2  :  Ye  shall  not  swear  by  my  name  falsely, 
where  the  Greek  interprets  :  ova  bfieia^e  -w  bi'd/narl  /uov  err'  ddlKu,  i.  e.y 
Ye  shalt  not  swear  by  my  name  to  that  which  is  wicked  or  false. 
The  Latin  translates  :  Non  perjurabis  in  nomine  meo.  You  see 
how  elegantly  the  divine  Jerome  has  used  here  the  word  per- 
jurare  for  falsely  "  dejerare,"  not  for  violating  an  oath.  It  was 
therefore  forbidden  by  them  of  old  (2)  to  take  the  name  of  God 
rashly,  /.  e.,  as  it  is  expounded  in  the  passage  from  Leviticus — 
not  to  swear  to  a  falsehood.  So  in  them  this  opinion  rose  out  of 
this  understanding — if  the  name  of  God  were  taken  to  that  which 


212  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

was  true  no  harm  was  done  even  though  this  was  in  ordinary  and 
daily  discourse,  but  that  it  was  not  permitted  to  apply  it  either 
as  "adjurare"  or  "  dejerare  "  to  a  light,  vain,  false,  fictitious  or 
lying  matter.  This  opinion  it  was  that  Christ  combatted,  think- 
ing that  they  ought  not  "  dejerare  "  either  to  the  true  or  false  in 
ordinary  discourse ;  everything  was  to  be  said  and  done  so  truly 
that  if  one  said  val,  that  is,  Yea,  the  neighbor  should  know  that 
what  the  other  had  said  was  true,  or  if  he  said  Nay,  the  neighbor 
should  know  that  for  truth.  About  the  official  oath  nothing  is 
said  here.  For  the  passage  runs  :  Ye  have  heard  that  it  was  said 
by  them  of  old.  Thou  shalt  not  forswear  thyself.  Where  is  this 
said?  Why,  where  the  discussion  is  not  about  perjury,  but  of 
"  dejerare."  There  it  was  permitted  to  take  the  name  of  God 
in  asseveration  of  the  truth.  There  follows  :  Thou  shalt  pay  thy 
vows.  Whither  does  this  point?  If  the  discussion  is  of  official 
oath,  where  then  does  the  former  passage.  Thou  shalt  not  for- 
swear thyself,  hold  in  this  sense:  Thou  shalt  not  fail  thy  oath? 
It  is  clear  therefore  that  he  speaks  about  those  oaths  in  which 
people  undertook  off-hand  to  do  something,  just  as  if  he  had 
said  :  All  that  thou  hast  sworn  to  do  must  be  done  correctly  and 
lawfully,  in  order  that  by  this  he  might  deter  from  rash  vows 
and  swearing,  on  the  ground  that  there  was  danger  that  the  Lord 
would  require  it  if  you  undertook  anything  lightly.  Then  he 
follows  with :  But  I  say  to  you,  swear  not  at  all.  But  of  what 
swearing  does  he  speak?  Why,  of  that  which  was  lawful  for  the 
ancients  when  he  wished  to  call  upon  the  name  of  God  for  some 
matter  true  and  important.  For  we  ought  not  in  a  matter  true 
and  important  adjure,  dejure  or  promise  anything  of  our  own 
private  authority.  Here  no  mention  occurs  of  the  oath  required 
by  public  authority.  What  follows  establishes  this.  He  says : 
Neither  by  heaven,  for  it  is  God's  throne,  nor  by  earth,  for  it  is 
his  footstool,  nor  by  Jerusalem,  for  it  is  the  city  of  the  great  king, 
nor  by  thy  head,  for  thou  canst  not  make  one  hair  white  or 
black.     These  examples  show  that  Christ  did  not  refer  to  the 


REFUl'ATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  213 

oath  [required  by  magistrates] .  For  which  of  the  Hebrews  ever 
took  [such]  an  oath  by  heaven,  earth,  Jerusalem  or  his  head?  On 
the  other  hand,  who  does  not  swear  off-hand  by  these?  One  man 
promises  something  by  the  cross  of  Christ,  another  asseverates  by 
heaven  and  earth.  This  then  is  what  Christ  forbade.  To  this 
he  directs  the  wind-up  of  his  whole  discourse.  Let  your  speech 
be  such  that  yea  means  yea,  and  nay,  nay.  There  you  have  it. 
He  does  not  speak  about  our  oath ;  he  does  not  touch  upon  the 
forum  or  court  or  magistracy,  but  upon  daily  conversation  in  our 
familiar  intercourse. 

Perhaps  I  seem  to  some  to  argue  for  this  opinion  tamely.  But 
if  they  weigh  as  often  as  I  have  done  the  passages  from  Exodus 
XX.  and  Leviticus  xix,  in  the  Hebrew,  the  Greek  and  the  Latin, 
I  know  they  will  think  as  I  do.  You  see  now  whether  enough 
can  be  said  against  the  Catabaptists,  since  they  have  not  con- 
sidered the  double  sense  of  the  word,  but  have  made  a  misunder- 
standing the  basis  of  their  error. 

(3)  Nor  is  this  a  good  reason  for  refusing  to  make  oath,  that 
we  cannot  change  a  hair,  for  if  it  were  legitimate  we  might  not 
reply  with  even  a  yea  to  our  neighbor.  I  have  answered  yea  to 
many  who  asked  me  whether  I  were  going  to  lead  an  army 
against  the  Catabaptists,  yet  at  no  moment  was  I  secure  from 
him  who  knocks  equally  at  all  doors.  Still  I  was  right.  Yet  I 
was  uncertain  that  I  should  live,  much  more  write,  but  no  one 
will  accuse  me  of  falsehood.  A  brother  promises  another  to  be 
on  hand  to-morrow.  But  because,  taken  down  with  fever,  he 
does  not  come,  he  is  not  accused  of  falsehood,  nor  does  any 
one  blame  him,  for  God  gives  him  the  excuse  of  necessity.  So 
also  when  he  is  summoned  to  an  enquiry  by  the  magistrate  under 
oath,  his  reply  is  not  such  that  the  power  of  almighty  God  cannot 
rightly  exempt  him.  For  when  Abraham  swore  to  Abimelech 
himself,  did  he  not  swear  to  do  something?  Why  then  did  he 
do  it?  Especially  when  the  Catabaptists  declare  that  he  could 
not  do  anything,  and  assert  that  Christ  meant  that?     Under  the 


214  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

law,  they  say,  it  was  permitted  to  make  oath.  But  Abraham 
made  this  reply  on  oath  430  years  before,  and  he  was  not  under 
the  law,  but  under  faith.  For  the  apostle  makes  him  our  father 
by  faith.  It  is  clear  then  that  Christ  spoke  against  that  insanity 
under  which  many  swear  of  their  own  motion  so  frivolously  and 
promise  something  as  of  their  own  authority,  or  swear  not  to  do 
what  they  could  not  avoid.  They  also  call  to  witness  for  any 
sort  of  thing,  not  only  the  names  of  heaven  and  earth,  but  also 
of  the  living  God,  thus  bringing  contumely  upon  God  to  their 
own  evil. 

(4)  When  they  seek  to  weaken  that  example  of  God  swearing 
to  Abraham  himself,  do  they  not  weaken  themselves?  How 
often  have  they  said  in  the  foregoing  that  we  are  to  do  what  we 
see  that  Christ  did?  But  they  add,  this  is  possible  to  God — to 
do  what  he  promised — but  not  to  us.  Must  not  the  same  be  said 
of  Christ?  So  I  say:  Christ  could  love  his  enemies,  I  cannot; 
So  I  must  not.  You  see,  good  reader,  that  although  they  try  and 
move  many  things,  yet  in  all  it  is  shown  that  they  have  laid  the 
foundations  of  their  error  in  some  marked  arrogance  or  malice 
or  at  least  ignorance,  as  in  this  case.  For  in  their  persuasive 
discourse  from  the  words  :  "  For  thou  art  not  able  to  change  one 
hair,"  they  infer  that  by  this  Christ  would  take  away  the  solemn 
obligation  known  as  an  oath. 

(5)  They  reason  from  the  less  to  the  greater :  If  one  may  not 
swear  by  the  throne,  how  much  less  by  God  himself  who  sitteth 
upon  it?  Not  inaptly  do  they  infer,  if  they  speak  of  perjury  or 
of  swearing  lightly.  For  if  God  forbids  swearing  lightly  by  his 
throne  because  it  is  his,  how  much  less  should  we  swear  lightly 
by  him?  But  if  they  speak  of  the  obligation  [of  the  oath],  they 
infer  wrongly  that  if  we  may  not  assume  an  obligation  by  his 
throne  we  may  not  by  himself.  An  oath  is  not  legitimately 
taken  and  as  it  ought  to  be,  "  any  created  thing,"  but  "  by  God  " 
himself.  An  oath  is  a  religious  matter;  he  who  makes  oath 
binds  himself  to  the  sum  of  religion ;  in  religion  the  chief  thing 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  215 

is  adoration.  Just  as  it  would  be  illegitimate  to  infer :  The 
throne  is  not  to  be  adored,  therefore  God  is  not.  So  it  is  no  less 
illegitimate :  By  the  throne  oath  is  not  to  be  taken,  therefore 
not  by  him  who  sits  upon  it. 

(6)  When  they  speak  of  the  testimonies  of  Peter  and  Paul, 
they  do  not  know  of  what  they  chatter.  They  have  not  yet 
learned  that  the  word  "testify"  is  in  most  elegant  use  among  the 
Hebrews  for  proclaiming  a  thing  boldly  and  constantly.  That 
one  may  give  testimony  is  clear  from  i  Tim.  v.  19  :  Against  an 
elder  receive  not  an  accusation  but  before  two  or  three  witnesses. 
I  ask  first  whether  the  apostle  speaks  here  of  Christian  witnesses 
or  the  unbelieving?  If  of  the  unbeHeving,  then  every  moment 
bishop  and  church  are  in  danger.  For  the  more  holy  and  inno- 
cent one  is,  the  more  do  the  perfidious  assail  him ;  and  Paul 
seems  to  have  ill  advised  for  the  church  and  the  bishop  when  he 
has  given  the  unbelieving  the  opportunity  to  testify.  But  if  he 
speaks  of  witnesses  within  the  church,  it  results  that  a  Christian 
may  give  testimony.  My  second  question  then  is — were  they 
who  gave  testimony  sworn  or  not?  If  unsworn,  again  the  bishop 
is  in  peril,  for  there  are  many  false  brethren,  many  who  the  more 
vigilantly  the  bishop  watches,  the  more  hostilely  aim  at  his  depo- 
sition. In  short,  it  is  the  fact  in  human  affairs  that  there  are 
few  whom  you  can  believe  unsworn ;  indeed  they  say  that  among 
the  Romans  in  reality  Cato  was  the  only  one  whom  they  could 
believe  without  an  oath.  In  fact  it  is  not  very  likely  that  within 
the  church  witnesses  were  ever  received  without  oath,  for  under 
the  spirit  and  prudence  that  was  powerful  with  them  they  easily 
saw  that  if  men  unsworn  were  accustomed  to  speak  against  the 
bishop,  daily  empty  accusations  and  movements  would  be  aroused 
against  the  bishop.  If  you  had  weighed  this  testimony  a  little 
more  carefully,  ye  immersers  not  only  of  bodies,  but  of  souls,  you 
would  not  teach  that  an  oath  may  not  be  taken.  But  what  good 
do  I  hope  from  you?  For  whatever  you  assert  you  affirm  willingly 
and  wittingly  against  the  Scripture. 


2l6  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

(7)  When  an  oath  is  taken,  they  say,  something  future  is 
promised.  But  what  is  promised  for  the  future  when  he  with 
whom  his  neighbor's  ass  has  been  left  swears  that  he  has  not  put 
his  hand  to  his  neighbor's  goods?  See  how  learned  and  pru- 
dently you  dispose  your  trifles.  At  first  an  oath  was  a  decision 
only  between  litigants ;  now  it  is  only  a  promise.  What  is  this 
but  babbling  forth  whatever  comes  into  your  head?  When  any 
one  testifies,  they  say,  he  testifies  regarding  the  present,  whether 
it  is  true  and  good,  just  as  Simeon  testified :  Lo,  this  one  is 
placed  for  the  fall  and  rising  again  of  many  in  Israel,  etc.  What 
if  the  apostles  testified  regarding  a  past  Gvent — the  crucified 
Christ — throughout  the  world?  And  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses^ 
not  only  in  Judea  and  Samaria,  but  to  the  ends  of  the  earth. 
The  apostles  testified  therefore  to  a  past  event.  Also  Simeon 
testified  to  the  future  when  he  said  that  Christ  was  to  be  a  sign 
to  be  spoken  against.  I  myself  now  testify  to  you  of  the  future, 
and  faithful  is  the  word,  /.  <?.,  it  is  sure.  I  testify  to  you,  whether 
you  accept  the  monitor  or  not,  that  the  time  will  come  when 
they  who  are  now  led  astray  by  you  will  recover  their  sight  and 
will  be  aroused  against  you  like  shepherds  against  a  wolf  or  a 
mad  dog.  Do  not  I  also  now  testify?  Why  do  you  not  insert 
in  those  laws  of  yours  something  of  your  sweet  attestation? 
That  you  may  not  be  ignorant  of  this,  reader,  listen  to  this :  At 
Appenzell  they  use  the  following  tricks  :  Some  Catabaptist  throws 
himself  down  just  as  though  he  were  an  epileptic ;  as  long  as  he 
can  he  holds  his  breath  and  pretends  to  be  in  ecstasy.  Those 
who  have  seen  it  say  he  presents  a  horrible  appearance.  Finally, 
like  one  waking  up,  he  begins  to  testify  about  what  he  has  heard 
and  seen  while  in  ecstasy.  They  have  all  seen  especially  that 
Zwingli  is  in  error  about  catabaptism,  and  this  opinion  one  pro- 
nounces gently  and  another  violently.  They  saw  that  the  day  of 
judgment  was  at  hand  two  years  ago,  and  that  catabaptism  was 
a  righteous  and  holy  thing,  and  all  that  kind  of  foolishness.  You 
must  not  suppose  that  these  tricks  are  concocted  by  their  com- 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  217 

mon  people ;  the  leaders  are  the  authors,  as  you  may  know  from 
thb  following  example  :  At  S.  Gall  there  was  a  Catabaptist  girl  of 
about  12  years  or  a  little  more.  She  was  the  daughter  of  a  right 
thinking  man,  as  they  say.  He  was  preparing  one  day  to  carry 
some  provisions  (he  is  a  provider  of  grain)  when  his  daughter 
warned  him  to  remain  at  home,  for  he  would  see  something 
wonderful.  A  little  after  she  fell  down  in  the  way  I  described 
above.  And  when  she  was  waking  up  she  babbled  out  those 
empty  ravings  of  theirs.  You  see  how  she  knew  when  she  was 
going  to  fall.  Why  did  she  not  fall  down  at  once  when  she  saw 
her  father  having?  Why,  she  had  not  been  taught  all  she  should 
say  when  coming  to  consciousness,  nor  been  told  of  all  that 
there  was  need  of  in  accomphshing  the  affair.  Every  now  and 
then  they  use  these  tricks  still  at  Abtzell.  And  they  call  it  an 
attestation,  though  it  applies  to  things  past  and  future,  so  that 
those  vain  seducers  of  old  women  cannot  say  that  when  any  one 
testifies,  it  is  of  the  present.  Oh,  how  sweetly  and  gently  do 
they  arrange  everything.  Ye  gods  and  goddesses  above,  below 
and  in  between,  be  propitious  to  them  ! 

(8)  They  rightly  tell  us  that  Christ  taught  that  our  speech^ 
should  be  ever  yea  or  nay,  yet  they  do  not  seem  clearly  to  under- 
stand it,  or  if  they  understand  they  do  not  act  upon  it.  For 
though  in  many  places  they  have  said  yea,  it  has  never  been- 
yea.  When  those  leaders  are  banished  against  whom  I  write 
especially,  and  are  asked  for  an  oath,  they  will  not  take  oath,  but 
say  that  through  the  faith  which  they  have  in  God  they  know 
they  will  never  return,  and  yet  having  been  seen  returned,  they  say 
the  Father  led  me  back  through  his  will.  I  know  very  well  that 
it  is  the  father  of  hes  that  brings  them  back ;  they  pretend  to 
know  it  is  the  heavenly  Father.  This  is  worth  telling :  When 
that  George  (whom  they  all  call  a  second  Paul)  of  the  house  of 
Jacob  [Blaurock]  was  cudgeled  with  rods  among  us  even  to  the 
infernal  gate,  and  was  asked  by  the  senate's  officer  to  take  oath 
and  lift  his  hands  [in  affirmation],  at  first  he  refused,  as  he  had 
IS 


2l8  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

often  done  before  and  had  persisted  in  doing.  Indeed,  he  had 
always  acted  as  if  he  would  rather  die  than  take  an  oath.  The 
official  of  the  senate  then  ordered  him  to  lift  his  hands  and  make 
oath  at  once  when  put  to  the  question,  "  or  do  you,  policeman," 
said  he,  "  lead  him  back  to  prison."  But  now,  persuaded  by  rods, 
this  George  of  the  house  of  Jacob  raised  his  hands  to  heaven 
and  followed  the  magistrate  in  the  reading  of  the  oath.  So  here 
you  have  the  question  confronting  you,  Catabaptists,  whether 
that  Paul  of  yours  did  or  did  not  transgress  the  law.  The  law 
forbids  to  swear ;  he  swore,  so  he  transgnessed  the  law.  Hence 
this  knot :  You  would  be  separated  from  the  world,  from  lies, 
from  those  who  walk  not  according  to  the  resurrection  of  Christ 
but  in  dead  works.  How  then  is  it  that  you  have  not  excom- 
municated that  apostate?  Your  yea  is  not  yea  with  you,  nor  your 
nay,  nay,  but  the  contrary.  Your  yea  is  nay,  and  your  nay,  yea. 
You  follow  neither  Christ  nor  your  ordinances. 

(9)  Be  these  things  said  about  oaths  which  they  would  abrogate 
from  human  affairs  only  for  the  sake  of  sedition  and  tumult?  For 
in  promising  to  the  untaught  the  liberty  of  the  flesh,  which 
neither  Christ  nor  the  apostles  preached,  they  use  these  arts  of 
rebaptizing,  separating  and  refusing  an  oath.  Meanwhile  they 
do  not  consider  what  Paul  says,  Heb.  vi.  16  :  An  oath  is  con- 
firmation and  the  end  of  all  strife.  In  saying  this  it  is  clear  that 
the  divine  apostle  said  not  of  those  who  are  not  within  the 
church,  "an  oath  among  them  confirms  or  decides  everything," 
but  of  those  who  are  not  without  the  church.  Among  these 
therefore  he  declares  that  all  is  confirmed  or  decided  by  an  oath. 
Nor  do  they  consider,  as  I  have  warned  them,  what  was  said 
above  about  witnesses  testifying  about  a  bishop,  nor  this,  that 
neither  Christ  nor  the  apostles  ever  taught  that  the  statement 
that  every  word  stands  or  falls  by  the  utterance  of  two  or  three 
witnesses  had  been  made  void,  as  is  easily  seen  by  Matt,  xviji.  16 
and  Heb.  x.  28.  From  these  they  might  have  learned  that  an 
oath  was  never  abolished,   although    they  had   no  word   but : 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  219 

Render  to  Caesar  what  is  Caesar's  and  to  God  what  is  his.  So 
they  are  told  to  render  to  Caesar  what  is  his.  But  they  owe  the 
oath.     Theiefore  Christ  orders  it  to  be  given. 

But  before  we  leave  this  a  warning  ought  to  be  given  the 
tyrants  of  this  world,  who  though  they  falsely  boast  in  the  name 
of  Christ  yet  do  all  to  beat  down  his  gospel,  that  they  must  not 
suppose  that  by  this  defense  of  the  oath,  which  I  have  furnished, 
an  opportunity  is  given  for  finding  a  defense  of  their  own  cruelty, 
because  nothing  has  been  said  thus  far  of  the  atrocity  of  abusing 
an  oath.  To  give  in  brief  the  sum  of  my  opinion,  I  myself  do 
not  think  an  oath  ought  to  be  demanded,  or  can  be  demanded, 
without  disturbing  conscience,  except  when  either  all  human 
attestation  fails  or  the  safety  of  a  neighor  is  gravely  imperilled, 
and  then  only  in  case  that  in  no  oath  that  we  take  is  the  name 
of  God  blasphemed.  This  opinion  of  mine  you  will  easily  extract 
from  what  has  been  said.  I  think  that  those  trifles  of  the  Cata- 
baptists  have  been  quite  thoroughly  refuted.  Now  I  go  to  other 
matters. 

PART  THIRD. 

In  this  part  I  undertake  to  treat  of  two  things — the  covenant 
or  testament,  and  election,  that  it  may  stand  firm.  Here  I  shall 
show  with  sure  testimony  and  argument  that  it  was  the  custom  of 
the  apostles  to  baptize  the  infants  of  behevers.  On  the  covenant 
then  I  speak  after  the  following  fashion  :  Although  the  Architect 
of  the  universe  created  this  great  world  that  it  might  have  man 
as  a  cultivator,  yet  before  any  colony  was  sent  out  to  any  part, 
nay,  before  the  future  colonists  were  born,  the  one  hope  of  the 
whole  race,  the  father  of  the  human  race,  rebelled  against  his 
Maker.  But  God  was  too  merciful  to  visit  the  betrayer  according 
to  the  magnitude  of  his  fault,  and  at  the  same  time  too  just  to 
pass  so  daring  a  deed  unpunished.  So  whom  he  might  have 
utterly  destroyed  he  made  wretched  and  full  of  misfortune. 
When  he  drove  him  from  Paradise  he  did  not  forbid  him  to 
become  a  father,  but  simply  that  he  should  not  be  the  father  of 


2  20  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

SO  noble  a  race  as  would  have  been  if  he  had  not  betrayed  his 
trust.     So  then  it  came  about,  that  such  as  the  offspring  was,  it 
was  disseminated,  as  the  cultivator,  in  all  the  corners  of  the  earth. 
But,  however,  it  grew  and  multipHed,  and  became  divided  into 
the  various  races  of  men,  yet  divine  Providence  in  a  peculiar  way 
designated  one  to  be  among  all  peoples  as  especially  sacred,  as 
if  it  were  a  venerable  priesthood  among  all.     Divine  Providence 
selected  this  race  for  this  purpose,  that  when  it  would  clear  the 
world's  sin  by  the  death  of  his  Son,  this  Son  should  take  a  body 
in  which  he  could  die  from  this  nation.     And  this   nation   he 
followed  in  all  times  with  his  great  blessings,  nay,  he  so  cherished 
and  preserved  it  in  every  crisis  that  by  observation  of  this  alone 
one  might  learn  that  God  was  about  to  accomplish  through  it 
something    exceedingly    wonderful.     So    that   whenever    it    was 
reduced   to   fewness   in   numbers   it  suddenly  sprang  up  anew; 
however  it  was  afflicted,  it  was  ever  restored.     Adam  believed 
that  the  son  born  to  him  was  he  of  whom  God  had  said  not  long 
before  that  he  should  bruise  the  head  of  the  devil ;  so  also  his 
mother  said  :  ["  Cain  "]  I  have  gotten  a  man  from  the  Lord,  /.  e.y 
have  obtained  or  received  the  man  whom  God  promised.*    When 
she  had  another  son,  she  named  him  Abel,  /.  e.,  superfluous,  not  out 
of  scornful  pride,  but  of  gratulation,  because  God  had  abundanty 
given  what  he  had  promised.     As  if  she  would  say  :  That  munifi- 
cent God  has  done  more  than  he  promised.!     But  in  a  short  time 
she  who  had  deemed  herself  more  than  happy  in  her  sons  was 
bereaved,  for  he  who  as  the  firstborn  was  the  hope  of  his  parents, 
arose  and  kiUed  his  brother,  who  merited  and  expected  no  such 
thing.     So  all  fefl  out  that  everything  depended  upon  one  ;  Abel 
was  slain ;  Cain,  the  murderer,  showed  clearly  by  the  working  of 
his  conscience  that  out  of  him  should  not  arise  the  one  who  was 
to  repair  the  fall  of  his  parents.     But  God  in  his  goodness  suc- 
cored them  in  this  calamity,  and  he  sent  them  another  son,  as  a 

♦The  Dame  is  commonly  interpreted  '*  acquisition." 

t  Modern  scholars  made  the  name  "Abel"  mean  "  breath"  or  "vanity." 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  221 

branch  from  whom  posterity  should  flourish.  So  his  name  was 
Seth,  i.  (?.,  one  placed  or  given,  for  the  Hebrews  often  used  the 
word  to  place  or  give  in  the  sense  "  given  of  God."  *  From  him 
then  posterity  was  derived  up  to  Noah,  who  was  the  most  just 
and  unoffending  of  all  in  his  times.  And  when  the  human  race 
was  borne  along  by  its  cupidity  and  violence,  and  by  its  boldness 
left  nothing  undone,  he  destroyed  all  in  a  flood,  since  they  would 
not  hear  Noah,  who  had  been  sent  by  God.  But  Noah  and  his 
family  alone  were  saved  in  the  ark.  The  covenant  was  renewec 
with  him,  in  whom  the  whole  human  race  was  renewed  and 
spreading  to  all  parts  of  the  earth  in  order  to  its  cultivation. 
Meanwhile  God  was  not  unmindful  of  his  counsel,  and  so  passing 
by  all  the  rest,  even  the  best  of  them,  he  embraced  Abraham  and 
selected  him  out  of  all  for  this  purpose,  that  from  him  might  come  \ 
the  posterity  that  would  save  not  only  the  Jews,  but  the  whole 
human  race.  With  him  then  he  renewed  the  covenant  he  had 
compacted  with  Adam,  and  made  it  clearer,  for  the  nearer 
approached  the  time  of  his  Son's  advent,  the  more  openly  did  he 
speak  with  them.  Therefore  he  promised  him  first  his  own 
goodness,  that  he  would  be  bis  God,  and  he  required  of  him  in 
return  that  he  should  excel,  /.  c,  should  walk  before  him  in  right 
doing.  He  then  promised  that  he  would  give  him  that  blessed 
seed  that  was  to  bruise  the  head  of  the  old  serpent  and  should 
raise  to  an  unfailing  hope  of  safety  the  head  of  man  bowed  down 
by  the  serpent.  He  promised  also  an  innumerable  posterity  to 
be  born  to  him  not  only  after  the  flesh,  but  also  according  to  the 
spirit.  Finally  he  promised  him  Palestine.  And  as  the  sign  of  | 
this  covenant  he  ordered  circumcision.  And  the  stranger  and 
sojourner  so  grew  that  they  who  had  knowledge  of  the  man  could 
easily  see  that  God  was  with  him.  And  God  did  all  that  he  had 
promised.  And  when  his  posterity  had  increased  to  an  enormous 
multitude  in  Egypt,  he  selected  not  one  tribe  alone,  nor  one 
man,  as  before,  with  which  or  whom  to  keep  the  covenant  he 

*  "  Seth  "  is  now  interpreted  "  substitution." 


222  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

had  made,  but  although  Judah  the  son  of  Israel  was  designated 
as  he  from  whom  the  Saviour  should  be  born,  yet  the  rest  of  the 
tribes  which  came  of  Abraham  were  not  excluded  from  the  cove- 
nant or  from  his  friendship  that  he  had  given  to  their  father 
Abraham.  Just  as  he  did  not  change  anything  with  those  who 
afterwards  were  of  Judah,  yet  not  of  the  house  of  David,  who 
was  himself  peculiarly  marked  out  as  the  father  of  the  coming 
Christ,  all  were  regarded  as  under  the  covenant  who  had  de- 
scended from  Abraham.  Now  to  return  to  the  point.  This,  I 
say,  is  the  Israelitic  or  Hebrew  people  whom  the  Lord  marked 
out  as  his  own  peculiar  people  from  all  races  and  peoples,  so  that 
it  should  tower  above  all  peoples,  just  as  the  colleges  of  priests 
stood  forth  prominent  among  that  race  and  all  races,  as  he  testi- 
fies in  his  words  in  Ex.  xix.  5  :  Now,  therefore,  if  ye  will  obey 
my  voice  indeed,  and  keep  my  covenants,  ye  shall  be  my  excel- 
lent people,  /.  e.j  my  own  peculiar  and  sought-out  people  of  all 
peoples  although  the  whole  earth  is  mine.  And  ye  shall  be  a 
kingdom  consisting  of  priests  to  me  and  a  holy  race. 

Here  then  the  Catabaptists  have  a  medicine  or  plaster  for  their 
whole  error,  if  they  would  suffer  it  to  be  applied.  If  ye  will  hear 
my  voice  and  keep  my  covenant,  he  says.  Here  is  God  speak- 
ing synecdochically  !  For  when  he  addresses  the  whole  people  : 
If  ye  hear  my  voice  and  keep  my  covenant,  etc.,  which  can  be 
referred  to  those  alone  who  hear  and  can  have  desire  to  keep  the 
covenant,  yet  he  no  more  excludes  infants  because  they  do  not 
hear  or  understand  what  is  to  be  kept  than  they  who  were  bound 
in  sleep  or  mentally.  For  they  who  are  of  one  body  are  consid- 
ered together.  But  since  infants  are  of  the  people  of  God,  they 
are  not  excluded  because  they  cannot  hear  or  understand.  For 
that  they  are  members  of  one  and  the  same  body  of  God's  people 
is  clear  from  this,  that  circumcision,  the  sign  of  the  covenant,  is  '' 
given  them.  For  God  with  his  own  mouth  named  both  the 
covenant  and  the  sign  of  the  covenant,  because  he  who  was  of  I 
the  covenant  was  sealed  with  this  sign.     Paul  in  i  Cor.  xii.  13 


REFUTATION    Ol-'    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  223 

says  •.  In  one  spirit  we  are  all  baptized  into  one  body.  But  you 
Catabaptists  yourselves  argue  that  if  one  comes  to  the  Lord's 
table,  he  must  first  through  baptism  have  become  of  Christ's 
body.  I  do  not  say  this  because  now  or  hereafter  I  wish  to 
teach  that  circumcision  or  baptism  introduces  one  into  Christ, 
but  that  I  may  show  that  the  circumcised  or  baptized  are  in  the 
body  of  God's  church,  although  I  take  no  exception  to  the 
change  of  form  :  We  are  baptized  into  one  body,  instead  of : 
We  who  are  of  one  body  are  baptized  in  one  baptism,  for  by 
nature  being  of  the  body  precedes  bearing  the  mark  of  the  body. 
So  also  Paul  says :  In  one  spirit  we  were  all  baptized  into  one 
body.  The  grace  of  the  spirit  by  which  we  are  admitted  into 
union  with  the  church  precedes  the  sign  of  union.  For  no  one 
is  sealed  unless  he  has  first  been  enrolled  in  the  army  or  service. 
I  therefore  am  coming  to  this :  If  they  who  are  baptized  in  one 
baptism  have  come  into  one  body,  doubtless  they  who  were  sealed 
with  one  circumcision,  the  sign  of  the  covenant — they  were  also 
gathered  into  one  body.  Hebrew  infants  were  sealed  with  cir- 
cumcision, the  sign  of  the  covenant ;  they  were  therefore  under 
the  covenant.  Since  they  were  under  the  covenant,  and  God 
spoke  with  that  body  which  was  joined  with  him  by  the  covenant, 
whether  we  will  or  not  we  are  compelled  to  confess  that  the 
words  :  "  If  ye  hear  and  keep  "are  a  synecdoche  by  which  infants 
are  not  excluded,  even  though  certain  things  do  not  apply  to 
them.  I  will  give  another  example,  to  try  if  they  can  in  any  way  be 
made  to  see  the  truth.  Plutarch  teaches  in  his  book,  "  On  the  delay 
of  the  divine  justice,"  *  that  a  people,  a  city  or  a  tribe  is  one,  even 
as  a  man  is  one.  It  therefore  makes  no  difference  if  races,  cities 
and  peoples  are  not  punished  as  soon  as  they  transgress,  for  no 

*  Eng.  trans.  Plutarch  on  the  delay  of  the  Divine  justice,  trans.  A.  P. 
Peabody.  Boston:  Little,  Brown  &  Co.,  1885.  The  Latin  title  is  De  sera 
numinis  vindicta.  It  is  one  of  his  Opera  moralia',  Eng,  trans.,  Phitarch^s 
miscellanies  and  essays  ;  trans,  revised  by  W.  W.  Goodwin,  Boston,  1872-74,. 
5,  vols. 


2  24  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

one  can  escape  the  hand  of  the  deity.  So  it  follows  that  some 
people  are  punished  many  years  afterwards  when  none  are  living 
of  those  who  sinned.  But  this  is  just  the  same  as  if  those  who 
sinned  themselves  suffer  punishment,  for  a  tribe,  a  city  or  a 
people  is  one  body  or,  as  it  were,  one  man.  So  consider  it  in 
this  place  that  the  children  of  Hebrews  and  of  Christians  are 
of  the  same  body  as  their  parents,  and  when  it  is  said  "  Hear,  O 
Israel  " — and  infants  cannot  hear — does  not  say  that  they  are 
not  of  the  people  of  God.  For  although  to-day  they  cannot,  yet 
some  time  they  will  act,  hear  and  understand.  And  those  are 
no  less  regarded  by  God  himself  as  among  the  sons  of  God  who 
are  destined  to  this,  if  when,  he  speaks  to  their  elders  they  them- 
selves do  not  understand.  About  which  in  the  following,  when 
we  come  to  election. 

There  follows  *'  Ye  shall  be  my  own  peculiar  people,  sought 
out."  The  Latin  interpreter  says  :  In  peculium  eritis  mihi.  Peter 
said  an  acquired  people,  or,  according  to  the  Hebrew  scheme, 
one  of  acquisition.  This  is  therefore  the  singular  people  of  God, 
which  he  bore  upon  his  shoulders,  which  he  lifted  above  all  peril, 
just  as  an  eagle  flies  above  all  peril.  By  which  metaphors  the 
divine  prophets  mean  this :  This  people  was  ever  loved  by  the 
Lord  above  all  peoples  of  the  earth,  was  preserved  and  fostered, 
just  as  a  father  lifts  his  children  upon  his  shoulders  and  bears 
them,  or  a  hen  gathers  her  chickens  under  her  wings.  But  this 
is  not  to  be  so  received  as  though  the  Hebrew  infants  were  not 
of  the  people  of  God,  since  they  bore  the  sign  of  that  body  not 
without  the  order  of  him  who  was  the  author  of  the  covenant. 

Of  all  peoples.  By  these  words  God  secretly  implies  election. 
For  God  has  not  bound  his  own  choice  or  the  freedom  of  his 
will  to  any  external  or  sign  or  deed.  But  in  every  nation  he  who 
fears  God  and  does  what  is  right  is  accepted  and  is  pleasing  to 
him.  Acts  x.  35.  Whence  from  his  selecting  the  Israelites  out 
of  all  peoples  it  does  not  follow  that  no  one  not  of  that  people 
was  to  be  saved   (for  the  election  of  God  is  ever  free),  but  that 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  225 

for  his  Son's  glory  he  would  make  that  people  wonderful  above 
all  and  peculiarly  loved. 

For  the  whole  earth  is  ??iine,  or,  evefi  though  the  whole  earth  is 
mine.  This  also  refers  to  the  privilege  and  glory  of  this  people, 
and  asserts  election.  For  although  all  peoples  of  the  whole  earth 
are  the  Lord's,  yet  he  selected  Israel  to  be  his  part,  possession 
and  lot.  Is.  xix.  25.  Blessed  be  Egypt  my  people,  and  Assyria 
the  work  of  my  hands,  and  Israel  shall  be  my  inheritance. 

And  ye  shall  be  my  sacerdotal  kingdom,  or  as  I  have  interpreted 
it.  Ye  shall  be  to  me  a  kingdom  consisting  of  priests.  For  the 
Hebrew  has  kingdom  of  priests,  though  to  avoid  the  ambiguity  is 
the  sense  given  rightly  in  the  shape  I  adopt.  Just  as  the  ambas- 
sadors of  Pyrrhus  or  some  other  prince  said  that  the  Roman 
senate  was  composed  of  kings  because  of  the  solemn  dignity  and 
majesty  of  the  senators,  so  the  whole  Israelite  kingdom  is  said  to 
be  a  kingdom  of  priests  or  consisting  of  priests,  both  because  of 
its  system  of  ceremonies  and  the  excellence  of  its  law  and  its 
prophets,  and  because  of  the  covenant  and  friendship  which  the 
Lord  had  with  and  for  this  state.  Therefore  the  Israelitic  people 
excelled  all  others  on  the  earth,  both  in  those  matters  which  per- 
tain to  God  and  in  those  pertaining  to  nobility  of  race.  For  as 
they  were  all  sprung  from  one,  so  from  them  sprung  he  who  was 
made  the  only  king  and  emperor  of  all  nations.  What  greater 
nobility  or  what  equal  grace  is  discoverable? 

Was  it  not  the  greatest  glory  if  one  were  sprung  from  that  race, 
since  God  had  cherished  it  above  all  others,  had  made  it  his  own 
and  made  a  covenant  with  it?  And  although  all  these  matters 
are  most  noted  throughout  Scripture,  and  everywhere  treated, 
yet  Paul  above  all  treats  it  in  biief  but  clear  words  in  Rom.  ix. 
3  :  I  could  wish,  he  says,  that  myself  were  accursed  from  Christ 
for  my  brethren,  who  are  my  kinsmen  after  the  flesh,  who  are 
Israelites,  to  whom  pertaineth  the  adoption,  the  glory,  the  cove- 
nants, the  giving  of  the  law,  the  service,  the  promises,  whose  are 
the  fathers  and  of  whom  is  Christ  as  concerning  the  flesh ;  who 


2  26  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

is  above  all  God  blessed  for  ever.  See  how  he  makes  out  the 
Israelites  to  be  adopted  as  sons  of  God,  even  though  very  many 
of  them  had  displeased  the  Lord.  He  says  theirs  is  the  glory, 
for  what  majesty  is  equal  to  theirs,  that  they  are  the  people  of 
God,  sons  of  God,  and  that  from  them  was  born  the  Saviour  of  all? 
Theirs  are  the  covenants  also,  for  whatever  the  Lord  has  cove- 
nanted with  the  human  race  has  been  done  through  this  people. 
Whose  is  the  giving  of  the  law,  for  the  highest  and  best  was  not 
satisfied  to  enter  into  covenant  or  alliance  with  them  without 
fortifying  his  people  by  divine  and  righteous  laws.  Theirs,  too, 
was  the  service j  for  God  showed  them  how  worship  could  best  be 
done,  in  righteousness,  equity  and  innocence.  But  it  is  not  to 
be  believed  that  the  service  of  animal  sacrifice  which  he  had 
pointed  out  to  them  displeased  him,  though  it  meant  only  disci- 
pline, circumspection  and  foreshadowing.  He  willed  the  disci- 
pline of  this  service  among  them  that  they  might  have  rites  by" 
which  they  might  less  revolt  to  the  service  of  idols  than  if  such 
rites  were  absent.  But  he  wished  to  indicate  by  animal  victims 
that  there  would  come  some  time  a  victim  that  would  cleanse 
their  souls.  For  he  wished  to  accustom  them  by  bodily  victims 
to  the  idea  of  a  victim  for  perfection  and  for  their  souls,  that 
when  they  saw  beasts  commanded  for  the  external  purification 
of  the  flesh  they  might  learn  that  a  victim  would  come  to  purify 
their  souls  also.  For  they  could  all  understand  that  God's  care 
was  first  for  the  souls  and  then  for  the  body.  Theirs  was  the 
service,  whether  it  represented  the  true  service  or  was  itself  the 
true  service,  for  from  them  was  born  he  through  whom  all  true 
worshipers  and  adorers  should  approach  to  God.  The  promises 
also  were  made  to  them  alone ;  I  say  nothing  about  the  sibyl's 
poems,  whether  they  were  produced  among  them  or  introduced. 
Still  this  people  of  God  stood  for  this,  that  whatever  good  he 
wished  to  bestow  upon  the  human  race  he  gave  or  promised 
through  this  quasi  priesthood.  It  was  then  the  special  people 
whose  were  the  promises,  even  though  he  spoke  also  through  sibyl 


REFUTATION    OF   BAPTIST   TRICKS.  227 

prophetesses  among  the  Gentiles,  that  we  might  recognize  the 
'liberty  of  his  will  and  the  authority  of  his  election.*  But  theirs 
are  the  faiheis  also,  men  filled  with  God,  some  of  whom,  though 
almost  the  whole  world  was  living  a  bestial  life  (for  where  God  is 
not  worshiped  what  difference  is  there  between  man  and  beast?) 
and  was  following  its  own  raging  affections,  alone  honored  God, 
believed  his  word  and  submitted  themselves  to  his  will.  Others 
boldly  announced  the  good  things  which  through  the  in-breathing 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  they  saw  coming  to  the  obedient  and  God- 
fearing, or  the  evil  in  store  for  the  rebellious,  impious  and  contu- 
macious. These,  I  say,  were  the  fathers,  whom  we  call  patriarchs 
and  prophets,  to  whom  the  promises  were  made,  and  they  came 
of  the  Israelites,  the  people  of  God. 

In  short  (for  why  should  we  use  much  testimony  in  so  clear  a 
matter?),  I  mean  this:  The  Israelites  were  God's  people  with 
whom  he  entered  into  covenant,  whom  he  made  especially  his 
own,  to  whom  also  he  gave  a  sign  of  his  covenant  from  the  least 
to  the  greatest,  because  high  and  low  were  in  covenant  with  him, 
were  his  people  and  were  of  his  church.  And  when,  in  giving 
command  or  prohibition,  he  addresses  that  whole  people,  the  in- 
fants are  not  excluded  because  they  understand  nothing  of  what 
is  said  or  commanded,  but  he  speaks  synecdochically,  so  that  so 
far  from  excluding  that  part  which  could  receive  nothing  that 
came  because  of  the  times  or  its  age  he  even  includes  it,  just  as 
when  a  person  acts  with  a  man  he  acts  also  with  all  the  family 
and  his  posterity.  So  that  he  often  addresses  the  whole  people 
as  one  man :  Hear,  O  Israel,  and  :  Say  to  the  house  of  Jacob, 
etc. 

Therefore  the  same  covenant  which  he  entered  into  with  Israel  ^ 
he  has  in  these  latter  days  entered  into  with  us,  that  we  may  be  j 
one  people  with  them,  one  church,  and  may  have  also  one  cove- 
nant.    I  suppose  that  some  will  vainly  cry  out :  See  how  that 
fellow  would  make  Jews  of  us,  though  we  have  always  been  told 

♦This  remark  shows  how  extremely  liberally-minded  Zwingli  was. 


2  28  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

of  two  peoples,  two  chinches  and  two  covenants.  See  Gen.  xxv. 
23  and  Gal.  iv.  22.  To  which  my  answer  is  :  Whenever  there  is 
held  in  Scripture  that  there  are  two  distinct  and  diverse  peoples, 
necessarily  one  of  these  is  not  the  people  of  God.  For  both 
when  the  Jews  were  God's  people  and  we  who  are  Gentiles  were 
not,  and  now  when  we  who  are  Gentiles  are  God's  people  and 
the  Jews  are  cut  off,  there  is  only  one  people  of  God,  not  two. 
In  Gen.  xxv.  23  we  read  :  Two  peoples  shall  be  separated  from 
thy  bowels,  it  is  not  to  be  understood  as  though  both  were  and 
would  be  his  people  at  the  same  time.  But  Jacob  he  loved  and 
Esau  he  hated  before  they  struggled  in  her  womb.  Therefore 
ever  one  and  the  same  people  is  that  which  cherishes  the  one 
true  and  only  God,  from  whatsoever  parents  it  was  born.  And 
again,  they  are  diverse  who  follow  a  diverse  cultus,  though  one 
and  the  same  birth-  pang  produce  them.  When  therefore  he 
spoke  of  two  peoples  formerly,  one  was  Jewish,  the  other  Gentile. 
The  Jew  worshiped  the  high  God,  but  the  Gentile  was  impious. 
Now  when  we  speak  of  the  church  of  the  Gentiles,  it  is  the  same 
now  as  that  former  one  of  the  Jews,  and  the  people  of  the  Gen- 
tiles or  the  impious  are  [now]  the  people  of  Israel.  For  we  are 
put  in  their  place  after  they  have  been  cut  off,  not  in  some  place 
next  them.  But  two  covenants  are  spoken  of,  not  that  they  are 
two  diverse  covenants,  for  this  would  necessitate  not  only  two 
diverse  peoples,  but  also  two  gods.  Since  some  ancients  did  not 
see  this,  they  taught  that  two  diverse  gods  existed,  one  of  the 
Old,  the  other  of  the  New  Testament;  the  one  cruel,  the  other 
gentle  and  kind.*  So  Paul  indeed  speaks  of  two  testaments,  but 
the  one  he  calls  a  testament  by  a  misuse  of  language,  when  he 
wishes  them  to  be  understood  who,  although  they  were  under 
that  one  eternal  covenant  and  testament,  yet  on  account  of  the 
externals  which  they  tenaciously  retained  betrayed  the  light  and 
Christ  himself.  Paul  therefore  called  the  way  of  these  a  testa- 
ment,  not   that   it   was  a  true   testament,  but  by  a  copying  or 

*  So  taught,  e.  g.,  the  Gnostics. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST    TRICKS.  229 

jmitation  of  those  who  so  named  it.    For  this  is  the  testament,  that 
that  God  Ahiiighty  is  ours,  but  we  are  his  people.     Now  before 
Christ's  coming  there  were  many  types,  but  these  were  not  them-  ^ 
selves  a  testament,  but  were  foreshadowings  of  the  light  to  come  . 
from  the  testament  itself.  "" 

They  therefore  who  according  to  the  gross  nature  of  man  held 
more  tenaciously  to  foreshadowings  than  was  right,  preferred  to 
lose  the  hght  rather  than  the  foreshadowings,  not  unlike  that 
madman  who  seriously  complained  that  his  friends  labored  for 
his  heahng.*  After  the  manner  of  these  then  Paul  said  there  were 
two  testaments,  one  leading  to  servitude,  the  other  to  liberty. 
For  some  supposed  that  they  should  consider  that  salvation  could 
be  obtained  by  acts  and  ceremonies.  Yet  others  saw  that  by 
mercy  alone  was  approach  to  God  through  him  who  was  to  come. 
But  this  was  the  testament,  that  an  appendix  to  the  testament 
foreshadowing  the  one  to  come.  -  So  therefore  Paul  calls  the 
appendix  to  the  testament  the  testament.  For  the  same  testa- 
ment, /.  <f.,  the  same  mercy  of  God  promised  to  the  world  through 
his  Son,  saved  Adam,  Noah,  Abraham,  Moses,  David,  which  saved 
also  Peter,  Paul,  Ananias,!  Gamaliel  and  Stephen.  Now  let  me 
adduce  Scripture  testimony,  by  which  all  becomes  clear. 

In  Matt.  viii.  1 1  Christ  says  :  And  I  say  unto  you,  many  shall 
come  from  the  east  and  west  and  shall  sit  down  with  Abraham, 
Isaac  and  Jacob  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  In  these  words  it  is 
disclosed  to  us  with  whom  we  shall  be  united — with  those  whose 
are  the  promises,  the  testament,  the  covenant,  the  fathers, 
prophets,  all  things,  as  all  things  are  ours  through  Christ.  It 
follows  therefore  that  there  is  one  church  of  them  and  us. 

This  way  tends  that  most  luminous  parable  of  the  master  who 
summoned  workmen  to  cultivate  his  vineyard,  some  of  whom 
came  early,  some  seasonably,  others  after  almost  the  whole  day 

*  Referring  probably  to  some  case  of  recent  occurrence  and  well  known  to 
his  readers. 

tThe  one  mentioned  as  visiting  Saul  in  his  blindness  (Acts  ix.  10-19. 


230  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

had  passed.  Here  we  see  one  vineyard,  one  Master,  and  (what 
caused  astonishment  in  the  workmen)  one  equal  reward  to  all. 
What  does  this  signify  to  us  but  one  heavenly  Father,  one  vine- 
yard— the  church,  one  reA^ard — Christ,  /.  e.,  salvation  through 
him? 

But  let  it  not  occur  to  any  one  that  the  ancients  had  access  to 
God,  not  by  Christ,  but  by  observance  of  the  law — a  thing  that 
some  seem  to  think  because  there  are  two  testaments,  one  that 
leads  to  servitude,  and  the  other  which  is  in  freedom  of  the 
spirit  through  Christ.  They  think  then,  that  the  old  requires 
observance  of  the  law  for  salvation,  not  Christ,  not  seeing  that 
the  law  even  when  kept  does  not  save.  For  if  righteousness  is 
through  the  law,  then  Christ  died  in  vain.  In  my  opinion, 
indeed,  the  law  would  save,  /.  ^.,  we  should  be  saved  (for  the 
law  is  spiritual)  if  we  kept  the  law  entirely  and  according  to  the 
will  of  God,  but  this  is  possible  to  no  flesh.  Through  the  law 
then  we  learn  only  our  condemnation,  for  by  it  we  are  included 
in  sin  and  bound  unto  the  penalty.  From  this  it  is  easily  inferred 
that  they  also  who  were  under  the  law  saw  that  by  one  salvation 
through  Christ  both  they  and  the  whole  world  are  saved.  This 
Christ  himself  teaches  clearly  when  in  John  viii.  56  he  addresses 
the  hypocrites  of  the  law :  Your  father  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see 
my  day ;  he  saw  it  and  was  glad.  Then  Abraham  desired  nothing 
so  much  as  the  coming  of  him  who  as  promised  he  did  not  doubt 
would  be  to  his  great  good.  Still  he  had  not  yet  come.  When 
then  the  time  was  fulfilled  and  Christ  was  in  the  world  Abraham 
already  rejoiced.  Therefore  as  they  had  one  and  the  same 
Saviour  with  us  they  were  one  people  with  us,  and  we  one  people 
and  one  church  with  them,  even  though  they  came  before  us  a 
long  time  into  the  vineyard.  It  is  also  clear  what  the  bosom  of 
Abraham  is,  about  which  many  have  anxiously  inquired.  For  it 
can  be  nothing  else  than  the  sodality  of  the  early  behevers  to  be 
everywhere  preserved  for  the  coming  of  Christ.  For  just  like 
Abraham,  since  they  were  justified  by  faith,  they  desired  to  see 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  23 1 

the  day  of  Christ  the  Saviour.  Which  bosom  (if  one  iikes  that 
word)  is  now  to  us  the  heavenly  association  with  the  Son  of 
God  and  with  all  who  are  with  him. 

Paul,  wherever  there  arises  a  question  about  the  difference 
between  Jews  and  Gentiles  who  had  faith,  carefully  proves  that 
one  people  and  one  church  arises  from  both.  In  Rom.  xi.  he 
makes  election  the  basis  of  this ;  formerly  the  Jews  were  by  elec- 
tion the  people  of  God,  now  the  Gentiles  are.  Yet  not  in  such 
a  way  that  from  the  Jews  none  might  any  longer  be  within  the 
association  of  the  elect  (since  he  was  an  Israelite  himself  and  yet 
was  sent  as  a  minister  for  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  of  salva- 
tion), but  that  they  should  last  until  the  multitude  of  the  nations 
came  in.  And  this  Christ  meant  when  he  said  that  the  lord  of 
the  vineyard  would  let  it  to  other  husbandmen — but  it  was  the 
same  vineyard.  They  are  not  then  diverse  or  two  churches,  not 
two  peoples.  They  are,  indeed,  two  in  name,  but  unless  they 
were  made  the  same  people  in  one  spirit  they  are  not  the  people 
of  God.  In  Eph.  ii.  1 1  he  thus  speaks :  Wherefore  remember 
that  ye  who  were  in  time  past  Gentiles  according  to  the  flesh, 
who  were  called  uncircumcision  by  the  circumcision  which  itself 
was  circumcised  with  hands,  that  at  that  time  ye  were  without 
Christ,  being  aliens  from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel  and  strangers 
from  the  covenant  of  promise,  having  no  hope  and  being  atheoi, 
i,  e.y  without  God,  in  the  world,  but  now  ye  are  in  Christ  Jesus 
who  once  were  far  off,  but  now  are  made  nigh  by  the  blood  of 
Christ.  For  he  is  our  peace,  who  hath  made  both  one,  the  mid- 
dle wall  of  partition  being  broken  down,  abolishing  in  his  flesh 
the  enmity  by  the  making  void  of  the  law  of  commandments 
with  the  ordinances,  to  make  in  himself  of  two  one  new  man,  and 
that  he  might  reconcile  both  unto  God  in  one  body  by  the  cross, 
the  enmity  being  slain  in  himself.  And  he  came  and  preached 
peace  to  you  that  were  afar  off,  and  to  those  also  who  were  nigh. 
For  through  him  we  both  have  access  to  the  Father  in  one  spirit. 
Now  therefore  ye  are  no  more  strangers  and  foreigners,  but  fellow 


232 


ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 


citizens  with  the  saints  and  of  the  household  of  God,  built  upon 
the  foundations  of  the  apostles  and  prophets,  Jesus  Christ  himself 
being  the  chief  corner-stone,  etc.  By  which  words  Paul  means 
throughout  what  I  do  in  the  present,  i.  e.,  that  one  people  has 
been  made  of  both  through  one  Christ  Jesus,  who  has  united  into 
one  both  those  who  once  were  near  and  us  who  were  most  distant. 
Weigh  carefully,  good  reader,  the  words  of  Paul,  and  you  will  find 
abundantly  what  we  assert  here.  For  there  is  no  need  of  treating 
at  length  so  holy  and  evident  a  proposition. 

Also  Heb.  xii.  22  :  But  ye  are  come  untO'  Mount  Zion  and  to 
the  city  of  the  living  God,  the  heavenly  Jerusalem,  and  to  an 
innumerable  company  of  thousands  of  angels,  and  to  the  church 
of  the  first-born  that  are  written  in  heaven,  and  to  God  the 
Judge  of  all,  etc.  By  which  words  also  Paul  teaches  that  through 
Christ  we  are  united  to  the  people  of  God. 

And  all  the  apostles  believed  this,  that  there  is  one  testament, 
one  people  of  God  in  all,  i.  e.,  from  the  least  to  the  greatest  they 
are  considered  within  the  people  of  God,  and  that  there  is  one 
church  of  God  compacted  out  of  all  peoples  through  one  spirit 
into  one.  For  Peter  in  Acts  ii.  36  says :  That  all  the  house  of 
Israel  may  know  assuredly  that  God  hath  made  Lord  and  Christ 
this  Jesus  whom  ye  have  crucified.  As  he  says  here  that 
Jesus  was  made  the^Christ,  that  is  Messiah,  the  Saviour  to  the 
Jews,  therefore  also  the  Jews  have  salvation.  And  a  little 
after  (he  says)  :  The  promise  is  to  you  and  your  children,  and 
to  all  that  are  afar  off,  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call. 
Here  he  asserts  that  the  promise  w^as  not  only  to  those  who  then 
heard,  but  to  their  children  also,  who  were  either  born  or  were 
to  be  born.  So  in  [Acts]  iii.  25  this  same  Peter  says :  Ye  are  the 
children  of  the  prophets  and  of  the  covenant  which  God  made 
with  your  fathers,  saying  unto  Abraham  :  And  in  thy  seed  shall 
all  the  kindreds  of  the  earth  be  blessed.  Here  he  makes  Christ 
belong  to  the  Jews ;  through  him  alone  they  as  well  as  we  are 
saved.     For  he  came  first  to  the  Jews  and  then  to  the  Gentiles. 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  233 

Rom.  i.  16.  Afterwards  in  Acts  x.  34  he  says:  Of  a  truth  I 
perceive  that  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  etc.,  as  I  have 
hinted  above.  Here  Peter  proves  that  Christ  is  also  of  the 
Gentiles.  We  have  therefore  one  and  the  same  Saviour.  Then, 
too,  in  Acts  xi.  18,  where  Peter  tells  how  the  whole  affair  with 
reference  to  Cornelius  happened,  it  says  :  When  they  heard  these 
things  they  held  their  peace  and  glorified  God,  saying :  Then 
hath  God  also  to  the  Gentiles  granted  repentance  unto  life  (for 
the  word  repentance  is  here  used  synecdochically  for  the  gospel 
itself,  as  I  have  elsewhere  shown).  We  see  therefore  attributed 
here  to  the  Gentiles  what  formerly  he  said  belonged  to  the  Jews 
and  their  children. 

Also  I  Pet.  ii.  9  :  But  ye  are  a  chosen  generation,  a  royal 
priesthood,  a  holy  nation,  a  peculiar  people,  that  ye  should  show 
forth  the  praises  of  him  who  hath  called  you  out  of  darkness  into 
his  glorious  light,  which  in  time  past  were  not  a  people,  but  are 
now  the  people  of  God,  which  had  not  obtained  mercy,  but  now 
have  obtained  mercy.  By  these  words  of  Peter  we  see  that 
Christian  people  are  now  that  elect  race  which  the  Hebrews  once 
were,  as  I  have  shown  above  from  Ex.  xix.  [5,  6].  Also  the  same 
royal  priesthood  which  is  now  of  all  nations,  which  also  belong 
to  God  (for  the  whole  earth  is  his),  and  which  the  Lord  holds 
in  honor  and  as  of  value  just  as  he  formerly  held  the  Jewish  race 
as  a  priesthood  of  all  peoples.  A  holy  race,  from  which  infants 
are  not  excluded — posterity  belongs  to  the  race  as  much  as 
parents  do — a  people  sought  and  obtained  by  the  blood  of  Christ. 
Which  people  was  not  a  people  once  (for  he  alludes  to  Hos.  i.  9), 
but  now  is  the  people  of  God.  Therefore  we  are  they  who 
formerly  Abraham  and  his  like  were. 

All  these  things,  to  shorten  sail  in  this  part  of  the  discussion, 
make  for  this,  that  we  may  know  that  it  is  one  and  the  same 
testament  which  God  had  with  the  human  race  from  the  founda- 
tion of  the  world  to  its  dissolution.  For  God  is  not  prosphafoSf 
i.  e.,  recent,  or  of  an  uncertain  wisdom  that  mends  in  time  what 
16 


234 


ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 


had  at  first  been  unwisely  begun.  He  knew  that  man  would 
perish  as  he  did  by  his  own  fault,  and  he  had  prepared  the 
healing  by  Jesus,  that  is,  the  Saviour,  before  man  gave  himself 
the  self-inflicted  wound.  God  therefore  made  no  other  covenant  \ 
with  the  miserable  race  of  man  than  that  he  had  already  con-  | 
ceived  before  man  was  formed.  One  and  the  same  testament  | 
has  always  been  in  force.  There  is  ever  one  and  the  same  un- 
changeable God,  one  only  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God 
not  by  adoption,  but  by  nature,  God  eternal  and  blessed  for 
ever.  So  there  could  be  no  other  testament  than  that  which 
furnished  salvation  through  Jesus  Christ.  By  him  alone  is  access 
to  the  Father,  so  Abraham  even  came  to  God  by  no  other  way 
than  by  him  who  was  promised.  One  way,  one  truth,  one  life, 
one  mediator  between  God  and  man,  Christ.  Through  him 
alone  is  access  to  God.  Therefore  there  is  one  only  testament, 
for  the  covenant  with  God  tends  only  that  we  may  have  eternal 
peace  and  joy. 

Yet  before  I  come  to  conclusion  I  wish  to  reply  to  a  questiori\ 
which  is  perhaps  not  so  fine  spun  as  it  appears.     What  difference  ; 
is  there  between  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament?     Very  much 
and  very  little,  I   reply.     Very  little   if  you  regard  those  chief 
points  which  concern  God  and  us ;  very  much  if  you  regard  what ; 
-concerns  us  alone.     The  sum  is  here  :  God  is  our  God  ;  we  are 
his  people.     In  these  there  is  the  least,  in  fact,  no  difference.  - 
The  chief  thing  is  the  same  to-day  as  it  ever  was.     For  just  as  | 
Abraham  embraced  Jesus  his  blessed  seed,  and  through  him  was  | 
saved,  so  also  to-day  we  are  saved  through  him.     But  so  farli's| 
human  infirmity  is  concerned,  many  things  came  to  them  in  a 
figure  to  instruct  them  and  be  a  testimony  to  us.     These  are 
therefore  the  things  which  seem  to  distinguish  the  Old  Testament 
from  the  New,  while  in  the  thing  itself  or  in  what  pertains  to 
the  chief  thing  they  differ  not  at  all.     First,  Christ  is  now  given, 
whom  formerly   they  awaited  with  great  desire.     Simeon  is  a 
witness.     Second,  they  who  died  then  in  faith  did  not  ascend 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST    TRICKS.  235 

into  heaven,  but  [went]  to  the  bosom  of  Abraham  j  now  he  who 
trusts  in  Christ  comes  not  into  judgment,  but  hath  passed  from 
death  into  Hfe.  Third,  types  were  offered,  as  is  shown  in  He- 
brews. Fourth,  the  light  shines  more  clearly,  so  far  as  pertains 
to  the  illumination  of  the  understanding,  for  ceremonies,  while 
they  of  themselves  made  nothing  more  obscure,  yet  added  much 
to  the  priests,  and  these  were  not  so  strong  in  inculcating  religion 
and  innocence  as  they  would  have  been  if  avarice  had  not 
induced  the  shortening  of  ceremonies.  Fifth,  the  testament  is 
now  preached  and  expounded  to  all  nations,  while  formerly  one 
nation  alone  enjoyed  it.  Sixth,  before  there  was  never  set  forth 
for  men  a  model  for  living  as  has  now  been  done  by  Christ. 
For  the  blood  of  Christ,  mingled  with  the  blood  and  slaughter  of 
the  Innocents,  would  have  been  able  to  atone  for  our  faults,  but  , 

J 


It. 


tlien  we  should  have  lacked  the  model. 

Now  I  state  the  conclusion.  >  Since  therefore  there  is  one 
immutable  God  and  one  testament  only,  we  who  trust  in  Christ 
are  under  the  same  testament,  consequently  God  is  as  much  our 
God  as  he  was  Abraham's,  and  we  are  as  much  his  people  as 
was  Israel. 

The  Catabaptists  object  here  that  Paul  wrote  in  Gal.  iii.  7  : 
"  Know  ye  therefore  that  they  that  are  of  faith  are  Abraham's 
children,"  and  like  passages  from  Scripture,  all  of  which  it  would 
be  "  pedantic  "  or  "  overburdensome  "  to  put  down  here.  But 
if  they  had  correctly  weighed  the  discussion  that  Paul  pursues 
here,  or  the  force  of  synecdoche,  they  would  raise  no  such 
objections.  Paul's  question  is,  whether  we  acquire  salvation  by 
the  works  of  the  law  or  does  grace  come  in?  And  he  decides 
that  grace  comes  in  by  faith,  and  not  from  works.  All  of  these 
things  he  says  synecdochically,  as  are  all  such  things  throughout 
Scripture  which  pertain  to  this  argument.  Abraham  was  justi- 
fied by  faith.  Here  is  synecdoche.  If  this  were  not  so  it  would 
follow  that  Hebrew  infants  were  not  of  the  people  of  God,  which 
has  been  shown  to  be  false,  for  they  did  not  believe,  and  there- 


236  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

fore  according  to  the  Catabaptists'  faith  they  were  not  sons  of 
Abraham.  Therefore  they  beheved  who  were  destined  for  this 
by  God  when  age  allowed  it  and  they  were  of  the  people  of  God  ; 
those  who  were  circumcised  grew  and  advanced  until  they  at- 
tained inteUigence  and  belief,  and  meanwhile  they  were  of  the 
people  of  God.  Not  only  believers  then  are  of  the  church  and 
people  of  God,  but  their  children.  And  when  the  Catabaptists 
admit  that  sons  of  Abraham  according  to  the  flesh  were  within 
the  people  of  God,  but  suppose  that  our  own  sons  according  to 
the  flesh  are  not,  they  commit  a  great  wrong.  For  how  is  the 
testament  and  covenant  the  same  if  our  children  are  not  equally 
with  those  [of  the  Jews]  of  the  church  and  people  of  God?  Is 
Christ  less  kind  to  us  than  to  the  Hebrews?     God  forbid  ! 

The  other  objections  that  they  offer  are  either  answered  in  the 
following  or  are  of  no  moment.  As  when  they  say  :  Then  males 
only  must  be  baptized,  and  on  the  eighth  day  only.  For  these 
constituents  have  been  removed,  so  that  we  are  bound  neither 
to  any  race  nor  time  nor  circumstance,  but  under  this  condition, 
that  in  these  matters  we  do  not  transgress  piety.  For  among  the 
ancients  females  no  less  than  males  were  under  the  testament, 
even  if  they  were  not  circumcised. 

It  results  then  after  all  this  that  just  as  the  Hebrews'  children, 
because  they  with  their  parents  were  under  the  covenant,  merited 
the  sign  of  the  covenant,  so  also  Christians'  infants,  because 
they  are  counted  within  the  church  and  people  of  Christ,  ought 
in  no  way  to  be  deprived  of  baptism,  the  sign  of  the  covenant,  and 
the  arguments  of  the  Catabaptists,  which  because  of  their  ignorance 
of  figures  and  tropes  they  think  valid,  are  of  no  avail  against  us. 
And  we  shall  not  on  account  of  our  ignorance  compel  the  Holy 
Spirit  to  lay  aside  its  own  method  of  speaking.  He  has  always 
spoken  to  the  whole  church  some  things  which  did  not  fit  a 
great  part,  but  that  part  was  not  on  this  account  cast  out  of  the 
church,  out  of  the  people,  out  of  the  covenant  of  God.  And 
the  fact  that  the  sacraments,  so  far  as  pertains  to  externals  is 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  237 

concerned,  were  not  the  same,  does  not  oppose  the  truth,  for  so 
far  as  meaning  is  concerned  they  were  the  same.  For  as  circum- 
cision was  the  signature  of  the  covenant,  so  is  baptism ;  as  the 
Passover  was  the  commemoration  of  the  passage,  so  is  the 
eucharist  the  grateful  memorial  *  of  Christ's  death.  Whence 
the  divine  Paul,  i  Cor.  v.  7-8  ;  x.  18,  and  Col.  ii.  11,  attributes 
baptism  to  them,  and  also  the  eucharist  or  spiritual  feasting  on 
Christ,  but  to  us  the  Passover  and  circumcision,  and  so  makes  all 
equal  on  both  sides.  So  far  upon  one  and  the  same  testament, 
church  and  people  of  God. 

Oil  Electio7i. 

I  am  now  compelled  to  treat  of  election  or  else  forego  my 
promise,  but  not  so  fully  as  the  subject  demands.  For  this  is 
beyond  my  power  and  purpose.  But  I  shall  show  election  to  be 
sure,  /.  e.,  free  and  not  at  all  bound,  and  above  baptism  and 
circumcision  ;  nay,  above  faith  and  preaching.  But  this  briefly. 
When  most  of  us  read  Paul's  epistle  to  the  Romans  we  ponder  a 
little  carelessly  upon  the  cause  of  his  mentioning  election  and 
the  following  predestination.  He  had  shown  that  salvation  rests 
on  faith,  and  faith  is  not  a  matter  of  human  power,  but  of  divine 
spirit ;  who  therefore  has  faith  has  at  the  same  time  the  divine 
spirit.  They  who  have  this  are  sons  of  God,  walk  not  after  the 
flesh,  but  whatever  they  do  is  a  help  to  them  for  good.  Now 
arises  the  query,  why  then  are  they  acursed  or  condemned  who 
do  not  believe?  Since  he  has  fallen  on  this  subject,  wilhngly  or 
not,  he  treats  it  worthily  about  in  this  order  and  manner :  We 
are  saved  by  faith,  not  by  works.  Faith  is  not  by  human  power, 
but  God's.  He  therefore  gives  it  to  those  whom  he  has  called, 
but  he  has  called  those  whom  he  has  destined  for  salvation,  and 
he  has  destined  this  for  those  whom  he  has  elected,  but  he  has 
elected  whom  he  willed,  for  this  is  free  to  him  and  open,  as  it 
is  for  a  potter  to  make  diverse  vessels  from  the  same  lump.     This 

♦  '*  Gratianum  actio  "  again — "the  giving  of  thanks  for." 


238  ZWINGLI    SELECllONS. 

briefly  is  the  argument  and  sum  of  election  as  treated  by  Paul. 
He  says  therefore,  Rom.  viii.  28  :  We  know  that  all  things  work 
together  for  good  to  them  that  love  God.  Now  lest  you  should 
say :  Who  therefore  love  God,  or  to  whom  are  all  things  for 
good?  he  anticipates  and  replies:  To  those  who  according  to 
purpose  are  of  the  called.  Do  not  understand  this  of  a  human 
purpose,  but  of  God's,  so  that  the  sense  is :  Who  are  sanctified 
of  God's  purpose,  for  to  be  called  is  here  for  to  be  truly  sanctified. 
As  when  it  is  said  :  He  shall  be  called  the  Son  of  the  Most  High. 
Here  shall  be  called  is  Hebrew  idiom  for  shall  truly  be.  I  return 
to  the  argument.  Purpose  is  for  Paul  that  freest  deliberation 
by  which  God  is  girded  for  electing,  as  in  ix.  1 1  we  see  when  he 
says :  That  the  purpose  of  God  according  to  election  may  stand* 
His  purpose  is  therefore  above  election,  /.  e.,  first  by  nature.  It 
may  happen  among  men  that  something  is  elected,  but  there  is  a- 
reason  for  its  election,  e.  g.,  it  is  elected  because  it  seems  useful 
or  right.  This  purpose  or  deliberation  is  not  free,  but  depends 
on  that  which  is  elected.  Since  Paul  wishes  to  show  that  God's 
election  is  born  of  his  free  purpose,  and  not  from  those  whom  he 
is  about  to  elect,  he  says  that  the  free  purpose  is  the  cause  why 
all  things  work  for  good  to  those  who  love  God.  Nothing  is 
ascribed  to  man's  merit.  For  he  adds  :  For  whom  he  foreknew 
{pronunciavit)  he  also  predestinated  to  be  conformed  to  the 
image  of  his  Son,  etc.  I  have  translated  nposyvu  by  "  pronun- 
ciavit,"  which  word  has  the  same  force  as  if  you  should  say 
predetermined  or  foreordained.  This  is  then  the  apostle's  mean- 
ing :  I  said  that  all  will  result  in  good  for  those  who  according  to 
God's  purpose  are  of  the  called.  This  I  would  have  understood 
thus :  God  freely  with  himself  settles  upon,  prejudges  and  fore- 
ordains (for  by  this  word  the  word  for  "  purposing "  is  ex- 
pounded) whom  he  will,  even  before  they  are  born.  Whom  he 
thus  foreordains  he  marks  out  beforehand,  /.  e.,  destines  them  to 
be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son.  As  if  he  should  say : 
No  one  can  be  conformed  to  Christ  unless  he  has  been  destined 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  239 

for  this.  Paul  proceeds  :  Whom  he  predestined  he  also  called 
Here  before  calling  we  have  predestination  or  marking  out. 
Whom  he  called  he  also  justified.  But  are  we  not  justified  by 
faith?  Yes,  but  calling  precedes  faith.  For  Christ  warns  also 
that  no  one  can  come  to  him  unless  the  Father  have  drawn  him. 
To  draw  and  to  call  are  here  equivalents.  But  whom  he  justified 
he  also  glorified,  for  they  who  believe  are  eternally  honored  with 
him  in  whom  they  have  believed.  Here  then  is  the  knot — How 
does  faith  bless  or  how  justify?  We  see  that  the  first  thing  is 
God's  deliberation  or  purpose  or  election,  second  his  predestina- 
tion or  marking  out,  third  his  calling,  fourth  justification.  Since 
then  all  these  are  of  God,  and  faith  hardly  holds  the  fourth 
place,  how  is  it  that  we  say  that  salvation  comes  of  faith,  since 
wherever  faith  is  there  also  is  justification,  or  rather,  each  person's 
salvation  has  before  been  so  determined  and  foreordained  with 
God  that  it  is  impossible  that  one  so  elected  can  be  condemned? 
But  by  a  light  blow  of  synecdoche  *  what  seems  insoluble  dissolves^ 
For  faith  is  used  for  the  election  of  God,  the  predestination  or 
calling,  which  all  precede  faith,  but  in  the  same  order.  So  if  you 
say :  God's  election,  predestination  or  marking  out,  calling, 
beatifies,  you  will  ever  say  right.  Why?  Because  the  harmoni- 
ous order  and  connections  of  these  are  such  that  you  may  use 
one  of  these  without  the  other  and  yet  not  exclude  the  others; 
especially  is  this  the  case  when  you  take  faith,  which  is  inferior 
and  posterior  to  election,  predestination  or  calling.  Since  then 
the  justification  which  is  of  faith  closely  follows  calling,  we  see 
with  no  trouble  that  salvation  is  attributed  to  faith  because  they 
who  have  faith  are  called,  elected  and  foreordained. 

But  why  is   salvation   attributed  to  faith  above    the    others? 
Why  does  Paul  use  this  link  out  of  the  chain?     I  reply,  because 

*  This  rhetorical  figure  wherein  the  part  is  put  for  the  whole,  or  a  whole  for 
a  part,  is  considered  by  Zwingli  an  unanswerable  argument.  Instances  of  it 
are  frequent.  E.  §.,  the  Athenians  are  often  spoken  of  as  if  they  comprised 
all  the  Greeks,  and  what  they  did  the  Greeks  are  said  to  have  dpne. 


240  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

that  is  best  known  to  us.  For  each  one  questions  and  examines 
conscience  according  to  Peter's  word.  If  it  rightly  repHes,  /.  e., 
if  with  full  assurance  he  thinks  correctly  of  God,  he  has  now  the 
surest  seal  of  eternal  salvation.  For  who  has  faith  is  called,  who 
is  called  is  predestined,  who  is  predestined  is  elected,  who  is 
elected  is  foreordained.  But  God's  election  remains  firm. 
Therefore  they  who  have  faith  are  justified.  For  this  is  justifica- 
tion, piety,  religion  and  service  of  the  Most  High  God.  So  that 
no  condemnation  awaits  them,  for  they  are  not  of  those  who 
say :  Let  us  sin  that  the  glory  of  God  may  be  the  brighter,  but 
of  those  who  as  often  as  they  sin  through  weakness  return  to 
God  and  pray :  Forgive  us  our  sins.  They  are  not  of  those 
who,  when  they  have  sinned,  are  so  far  from  returning  to  a 
correct  state  of  mind  that  they  fall  into  impiety  and  assert  that 
there  is  no  God,  but  of  those  who  grieve  not  so  much  because 
they  have  offended  every  creature  as  that  they  have  offended 
God  alone,  their  own  heart  and  soul  and  mind,  and  then  say : 
Against  thee  only  have  I  sinned  and  done  this  evil  in  thy  sight. 
This,  I  say,  is  the  justification  of  faith ;  to  these  all  things  are  for 
good,  but  the  contrary  to  the  impious.  Adultery  and  murder 
were  for  good  to  David,  for  he  was  righteous  through  faith.  For 
he  repented  his  deed  and  did  not  fall  from  hope.  It  was  evil  to 
him  who  was  not  as  other  men,  because  he  had  not  faith,  there- 
fore he  was  not  called  or  predestined  or  elected. 

I  think  these  arguments  are  brief,  as  I  promised,  but  clear  and 
sure.  But  for  what  purpose  ?  That  I  may  reply  to  the  Cata- 
baptists.  For  they  argue  against  me  in  the  tract  in  which  they 
suppose  they  have  refuted  me  :  "  How  are  the  Hebrews'  infants 
of  the  people,  sons,  and  church  of  God?  We  beHeve  the  elect 
are  of  the  people  of  God,  like  Jacob,  by  no  means  those  thrust 
out  or  repudiated.  For,  according  to  Rom.  ix.  11-13,  when 
they  were  yet  in  their  parents'  womb  and  had  done  neither  good 
nor  evil,  God  said  :  Jacob  have  I  loved  and  Esau  have  I  hated. 
How  then  could  Esau  be  of  God's  people?     It  is  then  false  what 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  24 1 

Zwingli  asserts,  that  the  Hebrews'  infants  were  of  the  people  and 
church  of  God."  To  which  I  think  I  may  now  the  more  advan- 
tageously answer,  inasmuch  as  I  have  said  these  few  things  about 
election  and  predestination,  in  about  the  following  manner :  It 
is  sure  that  with  God  no  one  is  of  his  people  or  of  his  sons  except 
he  whom  he  has  elected,  and  it  is  also  sure  that  every  one  is  his 
whom  he  has  elected.  But  in  this  way,  O  Catabaptisti,  all  your 
foundation  has  fallen  away.  For  not  only  behevers  (as  you 
would  understand  ''  believers  "  in  actuality)  are  the  sons  of  God, 
but  those  who  are  elect  are  sons  even  before  they  believe,  just 
as  you  yourselves  prove  by  the  example  of  Jacob. 

What  then  shall  we  do  with  the  sayjng :  Who  believeth  not 
shall  be  condemned?  For  infants  do  not  believe,  they  will  then 
be  condemned.  Again,  the  elect  were  chosen  before  they  were 
conceived ;  they  are  at  once  then  sons  of  God,  even  if  they  die 
before  they  believe  or  are  called  to  faith.  You  see  the  chain 
and  order  !  Faith  is  in  that  order  the  last  thing  beyond  glorifi- 
cation, therefore  what  precedes  it  is  no  less  certain  than  faith 
itself.  For  as  it  is  true  "  he  believes,  therefore  is  saved,"  so  it 
is  not  less  true  that  "  he  is  called,  therefore  is  saved."  (I  am 
not  speaking  here  of  that  calling  of  which  Christ  said  :  Many  are 
called  but  few  chosen.  For  there  he  means  the  external  calling, 
by  which  many  are  invited  by  the  preaching  of  the  word.  Now 
I  mean  that  internal  calling  which  Christ  calls  "  drawing.")  It 
is  equally  true  :  He  is  predestined,  therefore  saved,  and  he  is 
elect,  therefore  saved.  Do  you  not  £"ee  that  whatever  is  in  this 
chain  and  precedes  faith  is  equally  with  faith  followed  by  salva- 
tion? For  "  Who  is  elect  shall  be  saved  "  is  as  true  as  "  Who 
hath  believed  shall  be  saved."  On  the  other  hand,  equal  infer- 
ences cannot  be  drawn  by  arguing  from  the  prior  matters  to  faith 
unless  we  accept  faith  otherwise  than  for  that  fact  and  certitude 
of  mind  which  regards  the  invisible  things,  about  which  later. 
For  it  does  not  follow  "  He  is  elect,  therefore  believes."  For 
Jacob  was  elect  when  he  had  not  yet  believed.     Nor  does  this 


242  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

follow,  "  He  does  not  believe,  therefore  is  not  elect."  For  the 
elect  are  ever  elect,  even  before  they  believe.  When  therefore 
it  is  said  :  ''  Who  believeth  not  shall  be  condemned,"  it  must  be 
that  faith  is  used  for  that  chain  already  spoken  of,  so  that  the 
meaning  is  :  "  Who  is  not  elect  shall  not  be  saved."  Or  else  for 
this,  that  it  means  "  to  be  within  the  faithful  people,"  or  (as  best 
approves  itself  to  my  reason)  that  it  is  said  synecdochically  of 
those  alone  who  have  reached  that  point  that  they  can  under- 
stand language — Who  believeth  not  shall  be  condemned.  For 
faith  is  not  of  all  the  elect,  as  now  is  clear  of  elect  infants,  but 
it  is  the  fruit  of  election,  predestination  and  calling,  which  is 
given  in  its  fit  time.  Therefore  as  that  saying :  Who  believeth 
shall  be  saved,  does  not  exclude  those  who  are  elect,  and  who 
before  they  arrive  at  maturity  of  faith  join  the  band  of  them  that 
are  elect,  to  damn  them  the  more,  so  that  saying  :  Who  believeth. 
not  is  condemned,  does  not  include  those  who  are  elect  but  do 
not  reach  to  maturity  of  faith,  to  save  them  the  less.  By  the 
words.  Who  hath  beheved  and  Who  hath  not  believed,  it  may 
therefore  be  inferred  they  are  not  included  who  by  reason  of 
age  are  not  able  to  hear,  nor  those  to  whom  the  knowledge  of  the 
gospel  has  not  come.  It  may  also  be  inferred  that  those  sayings, 
Who  hath  believed,  etc.,  and  Who  hath  not  believed,  have  not 
the  sense  of  precedence,  as  though  faith  necessarily  preceded  all, 
/.  e.,  election,  predestination  and  caUing.  For  if  this  is  true, 
then  that  antecedent  determination  or  purpose  or  predestination 
of  God  would  not  be  free,  but  election  would  follow  then  finally, 
when  faith  had  rendered  the  man  suitable  for  election.  For 
only  those  could  be  elected  who  already  believed,  the  contrary  of 
which  is  clear.  But  the  words  have  the  "  sense  of  consequence  :" 
Be  assured  that  he  who  believes  has  been  elected  by  the  Father 
and  predestined  and  called.  He  believes  therefore  because  he 
has  been  elected  and  predestined  to  eternal  salvation,  and  he 
who  believeth  not  has  been  repudiated  by  the  free  election  of 
God.     And  here  is  disclosed  to  us  the  power  of  the  keys,  so  far 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  243 

as  they  were  given  to  the  apostles.  When  one  says  that  he 
beh'eves,  the  apostle  promises  him  :  If  thou  believest  from  thy 
heart,  be  it  sure  to  thee  that  thou  art  called,  predestined  and 
elected  to  eternal  salvation.  Therefore  this  man  of  ours  is 
absolved  and  justified,  about  which  we  have  spoken  above.  But 
when  the  apostle  sees  that  there  is  no  faith  in  those  that  hear,  he 
is  sure  that  they  are  rejected.  They  are  then  ordered  to  shake 
off  the  dust  from  their  feet,  that  is,  to  go  quickly  from  such,  not 
as  though  now  first  these  deserve  to  be  shunned,  but  because 
the  apostles  are  now  first  made  sure  of  their  rejection  by  their 
aversion  to  faith ;  on  the  other  hand,  when  they  see  the  faith 
they  are  sure  of  their  election.  So  therefore  such  words  were 
said  as  :  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them.  A  good  tree  cannot 
bear  evil  fruit,  nor  an  evil  tree  good  fruit.  Who  believeth  shall 
doubtless  be  saved,  for  faith  is  the  fruit  of  election,  so  that,  ye 
apostles,  ye  may  have  an  indication  of  success.  But  who  does 
not  believe  after  arriving  at  years  of  maturity  for  receiving  your 
teaching  is  not  elect ;  he  is  an  evil  tree,  so  you  may  know  among 
whom  your  labor  is  fruitless. 

From  all  this  we  make  two  necessary  inferences.  First,  that 
we  are  sure  of  the  salvation  of  those  who  show  faith  when  they 
reach  that  maturity  that  ought  to  show  the  fruit  of  election ;  if 
they  do  not  show  this  we  are  contrariwise  sure  of  their  rejection. 
Behold  how  we  recognize  salvation  or  shipwreck  by  the  faith 
alone  of  the  elect  or  rejected  who  have  reached  that  maturity 
when  we  may  expect  faith,  the  fruit  of  election.  So  that  infants 
born  to  those  who  are  in  the  covenant  and  people  of  God  we 
may  not  measure  by  the  norm  and  touch-stone  of  faith.  Second, 
since  those  alone  who  have  heard  and  afterward  either  believe  or 
remain  in  their  unfaith  are  subject  to  our  judgment,  we  err 
gravely  in  judging  the  infant  children  both  of  the  Gentiles  and 
of  Christians.  Of  the  Gentiles,  for  no  law  condemns  them, 
they  do  not  fall  under  that  saying :  Who  beheveth  not,  etc. 
Then  since  the  election  of  God  is  unrestrained,  it  is  impious  for 


244  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

US  to  exclude  from  that  those  of  whom  we  cannot  judge  from 
the  signs  of  faith  and  unfaith  whether  they  are  included  or  not- 
Of  Christians,  because  we  not  only  assail  rashly  the  election  of 
God,  but  we  do  not  even  believe  his  word,  yet  he  by  it  has  shown 
us  their  election.  For  when  he  includes  us  under  Abraham's 
covenant  this  word  makes  us  no  less  certain  of  their  election 
than  of  the  old  Hebrews'.  For  the  statement  that  they  are  in 
the  covenant,  testament  and  people  of  God  assures  us  of  their 
election  until  the  Lord  announces  something  different  of  some 
one.  Therefore  also  that  objection  is  stricken  out :  How  then 
were  we  sure  of  Esau's  election  when  the  Lord  says  :  Esau  have 
I  hated?  For  we  follow  the  law  throughout.  But  if  the  Lord 
does  something  out  of  the  ordinary  the  law  is  not  thereby  abro- 
gated. For  privileges  do  not  make  the  law  common.  Though 
indeed  it  is  my  opinion  that  all  infants  who  are  under  the  testa- 
ment are  doubtless  of  the  elect  by  the  laws  of  the  testament. 
And  when  it  is  said  :  Where  then  do  you  put  the  infant  Esau? 
Under  the  testament?  But  he  was  rejected.  I  respond  two 
ways  :  ( i )  All  judgment  of  ours  about  others  is  uncertain  so  far  as 
we  are  concerned,  but  certain  as  regards  God  and  his  law.  E.  g.y 
when  it  is  said  to  an  apostle  :  I  believe  in  Jesus  Christ  the  Son 
of  God,  the  apostle  thinks  him  who  says  this  of  the  elect  because 
of  the  certitude  of  the  word.  But  they  sometimes  deceive  who 
thus  confess,  as  did  Simon  Magus  and  the  false  brethren  who 
came  in  secretly  to  betray  the  liberty  of  the  gospel.  But  God 
himself  is  not  deceived,  nor  does  the  law  deceive,  for  God  knows 
the  hearts  and  reins,  i,  e.,  the  inmost  parts,  and  the  law,  if  all  is 
just  and  right,  does  also  not  deceive,  but  is  eternal.  Therefore 
we  ever  judge  according  to  the  law,  as  has  been  said,  and  the 
law  for  the  sake  of  one  or  many  may  not  be  considered  the  less 
universal.  (2)  The  other  reason  is  such  as  all  may  not  receive, 
but  to  me  it  is  sure.  All  of  those  infants  who  are  within  the 
elect,  who  die,  are  elect.  And  this  is  my  reason,  because  when 
I  find  no  unfaith  in  any  one  I  have  no  reason  to  condemn  him ; 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  245 

contrariwise,  since  I  have  the  indubitable  word  of  promise  :  They 
shall  come  and  sit  down  with  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and 
Jacob,  I  shall  be  impious  if  I  eject  them  from  the  company  of 
the  people  of  God.     What  then  of  Esau  if  he  had  died  as  an  in- 
fant?    Would  your  judgment  place  him  among  the  elect?     Yes. 
Then  does  election  remain  sure?     It  does.     And  rejection  re- 
mains also.     But  listen.     If  Esau  had  died  an  infant  he  would 
doubtless  have  been  of  the  elect.     For  if  he  had  died  then  there 
would  have  been  the  seal  of  election,  for  the  Lord  would  not 
have  rejected  him  eternally.     But  since  he  lived  and  was  of  the 
non-elect,  he  so  lived  that  we  see  in  the  fruit  of  his  unfaith  that 
he  was  rejected  by  the  Lord.     All  our  error  arises  from  this,  that 
while  we  hardly  learn  all  even  from  the  sequel  we  break  in  also 
upon  providence.     This  disposes  all,  so  that  not  only  Esau,  but 
not  even  a  root  in  the  sea,  not  a  weed  in  the  garden  or  a  gnat 
in  the  air,  lives  or  dies  without  it.     But  what  kind  of  a  vessel 
Esau  was  or  why  a  gnat  has  so  sharp  a  sting  *  we  can  hardly  learn 
from  what  is  done  by  them.     Since  then  we  learn  from  the  dead 
mind  of  Esau  that  he  was  rejected  of  God,  in  vain  do  we  say : 
Would  that  he  had  died  an  infant !     He  could  not  die  whom 
divine  Providence  had  created  that  he  might  live,  and  live  wick- 
edly.    You  see  then,  O  man,  that  almost  all  our  ignorance  of 
Scripture  arises  from  our  ignorance  of  Providence.     But  I  return 
to  my  subject.     Manifest  then  from  all  that  precedes  are  those 
two  inferences.     That  those  two  sayings  :  Who  believeth,  etc., 
and  Who  believeth  not,  etc.,  are  not  a  touch-stone  by  which  we 
may  measure  the  salvation  of  infants,  and  that  we  condemn  im- 
piously not  only  the  true  children  of  Christians,  but    those  of 
Gentiles.     They  alone  are  subject  to  our  judgment  of  whom  we 
have  the  word  according  to  which  we  can  judge.     I  think  I  have 
also  satisfied  those  who  say :   If  by  election   we  come  to  God 
Christ  is  in  vain.     For  this  is  election,  that  whom  the  Lord  has 
destined  to  eternal  salvation  before  the  world  was,  he  equally 

*  "Tuba"  means  "trumpet;"  can 'he  mean  the  mosquito? 


246  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

predestinated,  before  the  world  was,  to  be  saved  through  his  Son, 
as  Paul  teaches  in  Eph.  i.  4. 

A  second  pair  of  inferences  also  follows.  First,  they  teach 
incautiously  who  say  that  the  baptism  of  infants  can  be  tolerated 
through  love,  unless  they  mean  that  by  love  all  things  are  done 
among  Christians,  and  not  by  command  and  by  force  of  law,  just 
as  Paul  says  :  Owe  no  one  aught,  but  to  love  one  another.  But 
if  they  receive  love  in  the  place  of  complaisance  and  indulgence, 
as  when  Paul  through  love  sheared  his  hair  and  undertook  a 
vow  (for  he  did  this  by  indulgence  in  which  he  spared  the  weak), 
now  I  think  they  err  seriously  who  say  that  through  love  infants 
should  be  baptized.  For  what  do  they  mean  by  this  other  than 
that  now  one  may  not  omit  for  the  sake  of  public  peace  what 
some  time  must  be  omitted  when  it  is  permitted?  Let  them 
therefore  receive  my  opinion  after  considering  the  distinction  of 
love  which  I  premise.  Few  ceremonies  have  been  left  us  by 
Christ — two  or  three,  baptism,  the  eucharist  and  the  laying  on  of 
hands.  The  first  belongs  in  general  to  all  who  are  of  Christ's 
church.  The  second  to  those  only  who  can  interrogate  them- 
selves upon  their  certitude  of  faith.  For  the  apostle  says  :  Let  a 
man  prove  himself.  The  third  only  to  a  few,  those  who  superin- 
tend the  ministry  of  the  word.  Now  since  these  ceremonies  have 
clear  methods  of  performance  they  are  improperly  said  to  be 
done  of  love  when  they  are  done  of  precept,  even  though  what- 
ever God  commands  is  most  pleasing  to  you  because  of  your 
piety.  So  when  it  is  said  :  Go  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  into  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit,  there  is 
here  the  form  of  law  as  much  as  in  "  Let  every  male  be  circum- 
cised." What  the  law  orders  cannot  be  ascribed  to  indulgence, 
but  that  is  done  of  indulgence  when  at  the  celebration  of  the 
eucharist  certain  weak  ones  are  spared,  and  would  be  so  done  if 
the  habit  of  baptizing  infants  were  being  restored  and  certain 
weak  ones  were  spared  from  being  compelled  to  baptize  infants 
after  the  custom  and  rite.     This,  I  say,  would  be  done  of  love. 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  247 

The  eucharist  therefore  is  not  celebrated  from  love  in  this  way, 
but  it  is  stopped  out  of  love  by  many.  So  it  would  be  with 
baptism.  I  warn  you  here,  dearest  brethren,  to  weigh  again  and 
again  my  opinion,  for  some  seem  to  wish  to  cover  up  with  their 
astuteness  of  words  the  mouth  of  your  simplicity. 

The  second  necessary  inference  of  the  second  pair.  Whether 
the  Catabaplists  or  others  receive  or  not  my  opinion  on  election, 
predestination,  calling  and  faith — which  assuredly  is  not  mine, 
but  the  apostle  Paul's,  nay,  that  of  God  himself,  if  you  estimate 
carefully  the  providence  of  God — still  baptism  is  not  at  all  to  be 
denied  infants  on  account  of  God's  election  or  reprobation,  for 
neither  to  Esau  or  any  other  who  was  rejected  was  circumcision 
denied.  So  I  regard  the  whole  Catabaptist  argument  as  now 
overturned,  and  it  is  demonstrated  that  election  is  above  baptism, 
circumcision,  faith  and  preaching. 

That  the  Apostles  Baptized  Infants. 

In  the  foregoing  I  said  that  when  Christ  and  the  apostles 
referred  to  Scripture,  they  referred  to  none  other  than  that  of 
the  law  and  the  prophets.  For  not  yet  were  the  Gospels  written 
or  the  apostolic  epistles  collected.  But  in  this  I  would  not  speak 
as  if  I  would  take  aught  away  from  the  canonical  New  Testament, 
since  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  also  were  not  written  at 
one  time,  and  yet  the  authority  of  the  later  books  is  not  less;  but 
I  would  show  that  Catabaptist  writers  are  in  error  in  this,  that 
they  suppose  the  apostles  to  have  directed  baptism  in  accordance 
with  that  writing  that  was  not  yet  written.  Nay,  they  order  to 
be  omitted  what  is  verbally  omitted  in  what  was  written  afterward 
in  accordance  with  the  figurative  scheme  of  the  Hebrew  tongue, 
but  what  is  affirmed  by  the  implications  of  speech.  Meanwhile 
the  thing  itself  warns  otherwise,  and  the  men  who  wrote  the 
New  Testament  testify  that  they  were  not  able  to  record  all  that 
Christ  himself  did  and  taught.  I  have  undertaken  to  prove  a 
hard  thing  then,  the  Catabaptists  think,  but  it  is  easy  if  we  give 


248  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

ear  to  the  truth.  I  shall  first  employ  argument  and  then  testi- 
mony. But  the  arguments  I  draw  from  no  source  but  Scripture 
itself,  as  follows :  Every  one  knows  how  sharp  was  the  contest 
among  believers  about  circumcision,  which  contest  is  described 
in  Acts  XV. ;  some  contended  that  those  must  be  circumcised 
who  were  not  entered  into  Christ,  others  opposing.  But  when 
there  had  arisen  a  great  strife  the  delegates  from  Antioch,  the 
apostles,  and  the  whole  church  guided  by  the  divine  Spirit  de- 
creed that  circumcision  and  all  the  externals  of  the  law,  a  few 
exceptions  being  made  in  concession  to  -the  weak,  should  be 
abrogated.  Here  then  I  will  ask  the  Catabaptists  whether  they 
believe  the  disciples  were  less  solicitous  about  administering  the 
baptismal  rite  than  about  circumcision?  If  they  say  that  they 
were  not  solicitous,  then  the  piety  of  the  parents  which  has  regard 
for  the  children  as  well  as  for  themselves  leads  us  to  think  other- 
wise. Since  then  a  part  were  anxious  that  circumcision  should 
not  be  omitted,  a  part  that  they  might  not  confuse  baptism,  it 
appears  that  they  were  no  less  anxious  for  their  children  than  for 
themselves,  especially  since  in  the  beginning  their  infants  had 
been  circumcised.  It  cannot  be  then  that  if  the  apostles  were 
unwilling  to  baptize  the  children  there  would  not  have  arisen 
some  disturbance.  But  nothing  is  said  of  this,  so  there  was  no 
disturbance.  So  because  of  believers'  opinions  children  were 
baptized,  and  for  this  reason  there  is  no  distinct  mention  of  it. 
But  if  they  admit  that  parents  were  anxious  about  the  baptism  of 
their  children,  then  they  conquered  and  baptized  them,  for  bap- 
tism conquered  and  remained  when  circumcision  became  anti- 
quated. For  if  consideration,  strife  and  anxiety  did  arise,  and 
yet  the  opinion  of  those  who  thought  they  ought  to  be  baptized 
did  not  conquer,  then  circumcision  would  have  been  strength- 
ened and  baptism  weakened.  And  this  argument  pertains  to 
conjectures  and  indications,  yet  it  is  drawn  from  Scripture. 

II.  But  the  second  argument  is  insuperable,  gathered  by  com- 
parison of  Scripture.     Circumcision  was  abrogated  by  decree  of 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST  TRICKS.  249 

the  church  gathered  in  the  spirit.  Infants  were  with  their 
parents  within  the  church.  If  then,  according  to  the  Catabaptists* 
opinion,  those  infants  or  httle  childien  were  not  baptized,  yet 
were  circumcised,  it  follows  that  by  a  decree  of  the  church 
children  of  Christians  were  cast  out  of  the  church  and  were 
remanded  to  the  circumcision.  For  who  is  circumcised  becomes 
a  debtor  to  the  whole  law.  And  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should 
plead  here  that  account  must  be  taken  of  the  time.  For  the 
strife  about  circumcising  believers  arose  at  Antioch,  not  at  Jeru- 
salem, where  it  is  agreed  that  either  circumcision  or  baptism 
flourished. 

III.  The  third  argument  also  is  from  conjecture — that  we 
should  consider  the  race  from  which  the  first  behevers  came. 
They  were  of  a  race  that  so  clung  to  externals  that  the  apostles 
believed  even  after  the  resurrection  that  Christ  would  rule  cor- 
poreally. It  is  not  therefore  hkely  that  they  left  their  childrea 
unbaptized.  I  leave  the  rest  to  you,  reader,  for  much  can  be 
educed  from  these  bases. 

IV.  The  fourth  I  have  touched  on  in  the  foregoing,  /.  <f.,  that 
Paul  in  1  Cor.  x.  1-2  makes  us  and  the  Hebrews  equal.  All, 
he  says,  were  baptized,  all  ate  the  same  spiritual  bread,  and 
since  all  their  children  were  baptized  in  the  sea  and  the  cloud 
they  would  not  be  equal  if  our  children  were  not  baptized,  as  has 
been  said.  But  here  the  Catabaptists  chatter  out :  If  they  ate 
the  same  spiritual  bread,  therefore  our  children  will  also  celebrate 
the  eucharist.  This  has  no  weight,  for  by  synecdoche  to  each 
part  its  own  property  is  attributed.  But  since  we  have  a  precept 
for  the  celebration  of  the  eucharist :  Let  each  man  prove  himself, 
and  boys  are  not  competent  for  this,  while  they  are  for  baptism 
and  circumcision,  it  is  clear  that  with  Paul  infant  baptism  was  in 
use,  but  not  infant  eucharist.  Here  also  is  answered  the  objec- 
tion they  draw  from  Col.  ii.  11,  that  children  cannot  be  circum- 
cised with  the  circumcision  not  made  with  hands  nor  lay  aside 
the  body  of  sin,  therefore  baptism  did  not  come  in  the  place  of 

17 


250 


ZWINGLI   SELECl'IONS. 


circumcision,  since  circumcision  is  external  and  corporeal,  but 
this  is  internal  and  spiritual.  For  we  learn  here  that  Paul 
attributed  our  externals  to  the  Hebrews,  though  they  had  the 
internals  alone,  but  the  externals  not  in  the  same  form  but 
differently.  No  one  denies  that  they  ate  spiritual  bread  just  as 
we,  for  they,  like  we,  were  saved  through  him  who  was  to  come. 
But  they  did  not  carry  around  the  bread  and  wine  in  the  supper, 
but  used  other  externals  in  place  of  these,  manna  and  water  from 
the  rock.  Do  you  see  how  by  analogy  he  makes  the  externals 
equivalents?  The  internals  were  the  same,  the  externals  differ- 
ent. So  he  attributes  to  them  that  internal  baptism,  so  that  they 
as  well  as  we  were  cleansed  through  Christ ;  external  baptism  he 
expresses  by  the  analogy  of  the  sea  and  the  cloud,  but  to  us  he 
attributes  internal  circumcision,  for  we  are  under  the  same  cove- 
nant with  them  and  are  renewed  by  the  same  Spirit,  and  by  it 
are  circumcised.  That  is,  he  is  speaking  by  synecdoche  in 
accordance  with  the  age  of  each  class.  But  he  found  no  other 
external  than  baptism,  for  what  cause  would  there  be  for  making 
a  comparison  analogically  between  baptism  and  circumcision, 
when  without  that  he  could  have  spoken  of  the  spirit  being 
renewed,  unless  he  had  wished  in  the  same  way  to  make  equal 
the  internals  as  well  as  the  externals,  as  he  did  in  i  Cor.  x.  i  ? 
It  must  be  therefore  that  Paul  entertained  this  opinion,  that  our 
circumcision  is  baptism ;  this  he  would  never  have  held  unless 
he  had  seen  at  that  time  the  children  of  Christians  baptized  as 
he  had  formerly  seen  them  circumcised. 

V.  Not  only  three,  as  above,  but  many  families  were  baptized 
by  the  apostles,  in  which  it  is  more  likely  than  not  that  there 
were  infants.  This,  too,  pertains  to  probability,  about  which 
enough  has  been  said  above. 

Now  we  come  to  testimony.  You  will  put  together  here,  good 
reader,  whatever  has  been  said  of  one  and  the  same  testament, 
people  and  Saviour.  And  you  will  at  the  same  time  consider 
here  that  in  the  apostles'  time  no  one  used  any  Scripture  but  the 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  25 1 

Old  Testament,  nay,  Christ  himself  used  no  other,  and  what 
controversy  arose  about  baptism  would  have  to  be  settled  by  its 
authority;  but  since  this  not  even  leads  us  to  think  anything  but 
that  baptism,  the  sign  of  the  covenant,  must  be  given  to  infants 
equally  with  circumcision,  there  could  have  been  no  hesitation 
with  the  apostles  in  approving  the  baptism  of  infants. 

Origen  on  Romans,  book  v.,  thus  testifies  :  "  The  church  received 
from  the  apostles  the  tradition  of  giving  baptism  even  to  infants."  * 
Augustine  asserts  the  same  in  his  book  on  the  baptism  of  infants 
dedicated  to  Marcellinus.t  I  do  not  adduce  these  in  this  place 
to  give  them  the  authority  of  Scripture,  but  on  account  of  faith 
in  history  (for  Origen  flourished  about  150  years  after  the 
ascension  of  Christ),  that  we  may  not  ignore  the  antiquity  of 
infant  baptism,  and  at  the  same  time  that  we  may  attain  to  cer- 
tainty that  beyond  all  controversy  the  apostles  baptized  infants. 
So  the  Catabaptists  do  nothing  at  all  different  from  the  false 
apostles  in  former  tmes,  of  whom  Paul  thus  speaks  :  They  order 
you  to  be  circumcised  for  this  only,  that  they  may  glory  in  your 
flesh.  So  these  men  glory  in  mobs  and  their  seditious,  or  rather 
heretical,  church.  For  I  assert  truly  that  in  our  time  no  dogma, 
however  unheard  of,  can  so  rightly  be  called  heresy  as  this  sect's, 
for  they  have  separated  themselves  from  the  churches  of  believers, 
they  have  rebaptlzed,  and  have  their  own  assemblages.  Now  I 
lay  my  hand  to  the  appendix. 

APPENDIX. 

Though  I  ever  expend  most  liberally  what  little  talent  the 
Lord  has  given  me,  I  am  compelled  to  restrain  my  hand  in  the 
appendix,  not  out  of  niggardliness,  but  because  you  are  already 
wearied,  good  reader,  of  so  great  prolixity,  and  because  I  am 

*  Book  v.,  chap.  ix. 

t  A  treatise  on  the  merits  and  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  on  the  baptism  of  in- 
fants. Migne,  x.,  col.  109  sqq.  Eng.  trans.  Nicene  and  Posi-Nicene 
Fathers,  v.,  15-200. 


252 


ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 


compelled  to  yield  to  the  importunity  of  the  Fair  that  presses.* 
With  the  help  of  God  then  I  will  refute  the  foolish,  impious  and 
absurd  arguments  advanced  by  the  Catabaptists,  a  few  passages 
of  Scripture  being  adduced,  but  such  as  that  whole  crowd  cannot 
resist. 

I.  The  Catabaptists  teach  that  the  dead  sleep,  both  body  and 
soul,  until  the  day  of  judgment,  because  they  do  not  know  that 
"  sleeping  "  is  used  by  the  Hebrews  for  "  dying."  Then  they 
do  not  consider  that  the  soul  is  a  spirit,  which,  so  far  from 
being  able  to  sleep  or  die,  is  nothing  but  the  animating  principle 
of  all  that  breathes,  whether  that  gross  and  sensation-possessing 
spirit  that  quickens  and  raises  up  the  body,  or  that  celestial  spirit 
that  sojourns  in  the  body.  That  celestial  spirit  then  that  we  call 
soul  the  Greeks  call  entelecheia  [/.  e.,  actuality]  ;  this  is  so  lively, 
enduring,  strong,  tenacious  and  vigilant  a  substance  that  its  nature 
forbids  the  absence  of  action  or  existence.  Its  nature  is  incessant 
action  or  motion.  So  that  it  can  as  little  sleep  as  the  light  or  the 
sun  can  be  an  obscure  body.  Wherever  you  drive  the  sun  it  glows 
and  kindles,  as  Phaethon  experienced. t  So  the  soul,  no  matter 
whither  you  drive  it,  animates,  moves  and  impels,  so  that  even 
when  united  firmly  to  the  body,  which  itself  under  its  own  inertia 
sleeps,  yet  the  soul  sleeps  not.  For  we  recall  what  we  have  seen 
in  sleep.  Much  more  when  freed  from  the  body  is  it  incapable 
of  sleep,  since  it  is  a  substance  suited  for  continuous  activity, 
incapable  of  weariness.  So  the  body  sleeps,  the  soul  never,  but 
when  it  is  freed  from  the  body  this  last  sleeps  the  eternal  night 
Finally  the  Catabaptists  are  ignorant  that  by  the  Hebrews  the 
resurrection  of  the  dead  is  not  always  received  of  the  supreme 
resurrection  of  the  flesh,  which  we  shall  some  time  see ;  sometimes 
it  means  this,  sometimes  that,  continuance  and  existence  of  mind, 

♦Allusion  to  the  Frankfort  (on  the  Main)  Autumnal  Fair,  which  was  the 
great  book  mart  at  that  time;  the  date  of  this  treatise  being  July  31,  1527. 

t  He  ventured  to  drive  the  chariot  of  the  sun  across  the  heavens,  and  came 
so  near  the  earth  that  he  almost  set  it  on  fire  ! 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  253 

by  which,  freed  from  the  body,  it  persists  and  exists  in  life, 
oppressed  neither  by  sleep  nor  death,  for  it  cannot  be  so 
overcome.* 

In  Josh.  vii.  12  the  Lord  says  :  The  children  of  Israel  could  not 
stand  (surgo)  before  their  enemies,  and  a  little  after  [verse  13]  : 
Thou  canst  not  stand  before  thy  enemies.  Here  in  both  places  to 
rise  is  put  for  to  stand  fast  and  steady.  For  Jerome  also  translates 
"  to  stand."  In  Matt.  xxii.  31  Christ  says  :  Touching  the  resur- 
rection of  the  dead  have  ye  not  read  that  which  was  spoken  unto 
you  by  God,  saying :  I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  the  God  of 
Isaac,  and  the  God  of  Jacob?  He  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead, 
but  of  the  living.  By  which  reply  he  taught  nothing  else  but  that 
Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob  are  living,  though  dead.  Of  whom 
the  Sadducees  either  denied  the  resurrection,  /.  e.,  living,  or  at 
least,  after  Catabaptist  fashion,  asserted  that  they  [the  dead] 
slept.  For  Christ's  reply  referred  not  to  the  resurrection  of  the 
flesh,  but  to  the  fact  that  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob  lived, 
though  dead.  So  Paul  speaks  in  Heb.  xi.  35  :  But  others  were 
tortured  (or  crucified),  not  accepting  deliverance,  that  they  might 
obtain  a  better  resurrection.  Notice  here  how  resurrection  is 
used  for  the  life  of  souls,  which  they  are  to  have  when  released 
from  the  body.  In  this  sense  they  so  embraced  the  life  that 
follows  this  that  they  would  not  accept  the  present  life  even  when 
it  was  offered.  So  firm  was  their  faith  that  they  were  sure  the 
life  that  followed  would  be  better.  Whence  also  the  saying  of 
Christ  in  John  vi.  40  :  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day,  ought 
not  to  be  distorted  to  any  sense  other  than  :  ''  I  will  preserve 
him  in  life  when  he  dies  who  trusts  in  me."     So  he  either  implies 

*  The  theory  here  rejected  is  known  as  "  Psychopannychia,"  the  doctrine  of 
the  sleep  of  the  soul.  It  received  very  elaborate  refutation  from  the  youthful 
Calvin:  Psychopannychia^  qua  refellitur  quorundam  imperitorufn  error,  qui 
aniinas  post  mortem  usque  ad  ultimum  Judicium  dormire  putant.  Libellus 
ante  septem  annos  compositus,  nunc  tatnen  pritnttm  in  lucefn  aeditus.  Re- 
, printed  in  Calvini  Opera,  ed.  Baum  et  al.,  v.,  col.  165-232;  Eng.  trans.,  Cal- 
vin^ s  Tracts,  vol.  iii.,  413-490. 


254 


ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 


that  they  who  trust  him  will  never  die  or  will  ever  live  most 
joyously.  For  that  "  last  day  "  here  is  not  so  much  that  final 
day  of  all  things  of  the  present  world  as  the  final  day  of  each 
when  he  leaves  this  world.  This  is  easily  understood  from  John 
V.  24  :  He  cometh  not  into  judgment,  but  hath  passed  from 
death  unto  life.  In  i  Cor.  xv.  the  apostle,  speaking  of  the  resur- 
rection, makes  this  which  is  understood  as  continuance  or  per- 
sistence in  life,  so  to  speak  superior,  of  which  he  speaks  in 
general,  until  he  comes  to  the  passage  :  How  do  the  dead  rise, 
or  with  what  body  do  they  come?  There  finally  he  reaches  the 
discussion  of  that  resurrection  of  the  flesh  which  is  to  come  at 
length.  Do  you,  reader,  that  you  may  see  that  I  assert  nothing 
rashly,  come  to  this  passage,  dismissing  the  rest.  Notice  how 
"  From  man  came  death,  and  from  man  the  resurrection  from 
the  dead,  for  as  in  Adam  all  die,  so  in  Christ  all  are  made  alive," 
pertains  not  only  to  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh,  but  to  that  life 
which  follows  this  at  once.  For  through  Adam  we  die,  but 
through  Christ  we  are  preserved  in  life.  For  he  says :  He  who 
believeth  in  me  shall  live  even  though  he  die.  Then  consider 
what  follows  :  Else  what  shall  they  do  who  are  baptized  for  the 
dead  if  the  dead  rise  not  at  all?  Why  are  they  then  baptized 
for  the  dead?  You  see  the  ancients  had  a  custom  of  baptizing 
themselves  in  behalf  of  the  dead,  not  that  this  is  approved  by 
Paul  or  us  (it  was  a  foolish  thing  which  followed  the  faithful  out 
of  unbelief  even  unto  belief,  for  some  things  cling  which  per- 
versely have  the  appearance  of  piety,  especially  toward  parents 
and  relatives).  But  the  apostle  acutely  employed  the  foolish 
abuse  of  bapitism — which  in  my  judgment  was  nothing  else  than 
the  sprinkling  with  lustral  water  the  graves  of  their  dead,  as 
some  do  to-day— against  those  who  denied  that  the  soul  lived 
after  it  left  the  body  until  it  was  raised  for  judgment.  And  he 
thus  catches  them  :  If  then  the  soul  sleeps,  why  do  you,  too, 
moisten  with  lustral  water  the  graves  of  the  dead?  What  benefit 
do  you   do   those   who  do  not   live,  but  are  either  nothing  or 


REFUTATION   OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  255 

asleep?  You  may  note  here  in  passing,  reader,  that  this  argu- 
ment is  used  partly  in  behalf  of  infant  baptism.  For  if  they 
supposed  that  with  baptismal  or  lustral  water  they  accomplished 
something  for  the  dead,  much  less  would  they  refuse  it  to  children. 
For  they  would  do  this  according  to  the  Lord's  word,  for  that 
they  would  have  no  document.  Third,  consider  this,  which  he 
adds  :  And  why  stand  we  in  jeopardy  every  hoar?  I  die  daily, 
etc.  For  this,  too,  tends  hither.  Paul  means  :  If  either  no  life 
follows  this,  or  a  sleep  more  than  Epimenidean,*  I  should  be 
foolish  to  undergo  every  danger  daily.  But  it  is  very  different. 
Eternal  life  follows  this  immediately,  for  otherwise  I  would  not 
expose  myself  rashly  to  dangers  of  this-  kind.  Fourth,  he  says  : 
Let  us  eat,  etc.,  and  even  "  Perverse  communications  corrupt 
good  manners  "  points  this  way.  For  nothing  equally  corrupts 
manners  with  teaching  that  the  soul  dies,  or,  as  the  Catabaptists 
now  blaspheme,  sleeps  till  the  last  day,  and  then  they  affirm  that 
the  devil  and  all  are  saved.  What  penalty  then  awaits  the  faith- 
less and  criminal?  This  corruption  would  not  spread  so  widely 
if  they  only  denied  that  the  flesh  would  live  again.  Fifth, 
consider  this,  too  :  Eknepsate  dikaios,  /.  <f.,  be  vigilant.  These 
words  reflect  Paul's  keenness.  For  when  they,  pressed  in  the  sleep 
of  ignorance,  suppose  (like  the  wolf  which  believes  that  all  ani- 
mals eat  raw  flesh  because  it  does  so  itself)  that  souls  sleep,  he 
says  therefore  wake  up.  And  when  because  of  their  keenness 
these  little  scholars  seem  to  themselves  by  no  means  to  sleep,  he 
rightly  says  wake  up.  For  you  think  that  you  are  awake  and 
have  hit  the  nail  on  the  head  when  you  are  dreaming  so  som- 
nolently about  sleep.  After  this  weigh  carefully  the  following, 
reader,  and  when  you  see  that  the  apostle  at  first  is  speaking  in 
general  about  the  life  of  the  soul  after  this  life,  and  thence  comes 
to  the  resurrection  of  the  flesh,  return  to  this  and  you  will  see 
that  the  Catabaptists  are  oppressed  not  so  much  by  sleep  as  by 
evil,  and  teach  whatever  occurs  to  them. 

*  According  to  the  tale  Epimenides  slept  fifty-seven  years. 


256  ZWINGLI   SELECTIONS. 

J  I.  The  Catabaptist£  teach  this,  too,  that  the  devil  and  all 
impious  will  be  blessed.  Why  then  do  they  threaten  us  with 
eternal  damnation  unless  we  join  them?  See  how  consistent 
is  their  teaching  !  When  we  die  we  shall  sleep  till  the  ^ast  day, 
then  we  shall  be  cleared  in  the  judgment.  So  the  lower  world 
is  done  away  with,  and  Gehenna,  and  the  inextinguishable  fire, 
and  the  flames  which  devour  the  tares  gathered  into  bundles. 
But  they  have  learned  that  ^^V^,  i'  ^v  ^he  Hebrew  word  mean- 
ing forever,  does  not  mean  interminable  duration.  Here  they 
do  just  as  they  do  everywhere.  When  they  have  learned  one 
thing,  what  they  either  are  ignorant  of  or  will  not  see  they  turn 
aside  and  reject.  Let  them  therefore  take  Luke  i.  33  :  He  shall 
reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob  forever.  Is  this  forever  used  for 
some  ages?  Another  witness  is  Matt.  xxv.  41  :  Depart  from  me, 
ye  cursed,  into  eternal  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels. 
Tell  me  here,  when  will  that  fire  have  an  end  if  eternal  is  always 
a  definite  time?  How  many  ages,  I  ask,  will  there  be  when  this 
age  shall  be  finished?  So  that  you  are  able  to  say  how  long  that 
fire  will  endure  before  it  is  extinguished.  But  why  do  I  ask,  as 
if  you  said  anything  but  what  is  most  vain  !  And  so  do  you,  O 
reader,  listen  :  In  that  last  judgment,  after  which  there  shall  be 
no  other,  after  which  there  shall  be  no  age  but  sheer  eternity, 
Christ  will  say :  Depart  hence  from  me  into  eternal  fire.  What 
end  will  that  have  that  can  find  no  end?  For  if  that  "  eternal " 
were  temporary,  as  it  cannot  be,  for  then  all  time  ceases,  then 
the  salvation  of  the  blessed  would  be  temporary.  But  the  foolish 
talk  foolishness. 

III.  Catabaptists  assume  to  themselves  all,  the  ofiice  of  preach- 
ing, and  of  others  who  are  legitimately  set  apart  by  Christian 
churches  they  inquire.  Who  elected  you?  For  they  are  not  sent 
even  by  their  evil  church.  But  here  they  do  not  regard  Scrip- 
ture. It  has  no  force.  We  do  not  read  that  any  of  the  true 
apostles  assumed  to  himself  the  ministry  of  the  word.  So  no 
one  ought  to  assume  it  to  himself.     When  Paul  asks  :   How  shall 


REFUTATION    OF    BAPTIST   TRICKS.  257 

they  preach  unless  they  are  sent?  let  him   hear,  Catabaptists. 
By  what  authority,  pray?     That  of  the  father  of  lies  and  strife. 

IV.  Wherever  it  suits,  the  Catabaptists  deny  Scripture  and 
assert  their  own  spirit.  But  we  know  that  Scriptures  are  to  be 
interpreted  by  the  spirit,  but  not  by  that  contentious  and  rash 
spirit  which  the  Catabaptists  excite,  rather  by  the  true,  eternal, 
peaceful  and  self-consistent  spirit.  We  know  also  that  Christ 
appealed  to  Scripture,  who  yet  gave  by  sign  and  teaching  suffi- 
cient proof  whether  he  spoke  from  God,  so  that  neither  a  Cata- 
baptist  nor  any  other  should  dare  to  demand  credence  for  himself 
when  he  speaks  without  Scripture  authority.  So  that  very  won- 
derful is  the  effrontery  with  which  they  dare  to  demand  Scripture 
proof  for  infant  baptism,  rather  from  non-Scripture.  For  they 
have  nothing  by  which  they  may  trust  in  Scripture,  but  only  a 
negative  basis  alone  when  they  say :  We  do  not  read  that  the 
apostles  baptized  infants,  therefore  they  should  not  be  baptized. 
They  ward  off  all  Scripture  by  the  boss  of  an  asserted  spirit.  Spurn 
not  prophecy,  they  say,  and  do  not  extinguish  the  spirit.  Right 
enough  !  But  what  is  added?  Prove  all  things.  We  shall  then 
prove  the  spirit,  for  the  divine  John  warns  not  to  trust  every 
spirit,  but  to  prove  them  whether  they  are  of  God.  You  deny 
that  Christ  is  by  nature  the  Son  of  God,  the  propitiation  for  the 
sins  of  all  the  world.  Your  spirit  is  then  not  of  God  by  John's 
test.  So  we  spurn  your  prophecy  no  otherwise  than  as  when  Saul 
put  himself  into  the  company  of  prophets.  You  extinguish  the 
spirit  by  your  rebaptism.  Why  not,  when  it  is  so  often  sub- 
merged? For  it  is  not  that  spirit  which  at  the  foundation  of 
the  world  brooded  over  the  waters,  but  that  which  hurled  itself 
into  swine  with  the  great  damage  of  the  neighbors,  itself  doubtless 
swimming  out  and  leaving  those  amid  the  swamps  of  Gennesaret 
who  ought  to  have  solaced  the  winter  of  the  poor.  Attend  to 
the  allegory. 


258  ZWINGLI    SELECTIONS. 

PERORATION. 
I  doubt  not,  most  pious  reader,  that  you  have  long  missed  in 
us  that  direction  of  Paul :  Bear  with  one  another  in  love,  endeav- 
oring to  keep  the  unity  of  the  spirit  in  the  bond  of  peace.  But 
for  your  missing  it,  we  who  are  on  the  side  of  true  baptism  are 
not  in  fault.  For  nothing  grieves  us  so  much  as  their  audacity. 
For  though,  as  the  apostle  continues,  we  are  one  body  and  one 
soul  or  spirit,  in  that  we  are  called  to  one  and  the  same  hope, 
they  are  unwiUing  to  hear  the  apostle's  warning.  Por  secretly 
they  have  taught  what  is  not  right,  doubtless  not  knowing  "  One 
Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism."  So  it  is  not  strange  that  they 
have  left  us,  since  they  who  do  not  see  those  things  are  not  of 
us.  It  is  yours  meanwhile  to  advance  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord, 
and  to  guard  yourself  from  the  hypocrisy  of  evil  men.  Farewell, 
and  pray  for  the  victory  for  truth.  I  turn  to  the  "  Disputation  at 
Baden,"  which  everybody  says  has  been  distorted  intentionally  by 
the  printers,  but  which  I  have  not  yet  had  time  to  read,  so  that 
if  it  requires  refutation  at  my  hands  I  may  give  it.*  Be  assured 
that  all  this  when  it  was  printing  was  snatched  from  the  jaws  of 
the  pen. 

*  Baden  is  a  town  only  12  miles  northwest  of  Zurich,  but  such  a  centre  of 
the  bitterest  foes  of  Zwingli  that  he  did  not  venture  to  go  thither  to  attend 
the  Disputation.  It  was  the  Old  Church's  reply  to  the  Zurich  Disputation  of 
1523,  and  lasted  from  May  21st  to  June  i8th,  1526.  The  Acts  were  published 
at  Luzem,  May  18,1527. 


^ 


1 

y  DATE  DUE 

SEP  '^ 

r 

f-'?7?-M 

\ 

-^ 

"'^^N.J 

ia«w««5mr 

0i»itimi»>miM 

ie^^V^- 

a^^ttd^Mi^iiS 

M^ 

tfUMMKKWeW 

^§s^- 

.  ^^T*^'?3S!w; 

*«!^S«^^v- 

\i  n^i  i'Tff 

•^^-^tlflR 

WwT^ 

o'  ;i.yijy. 

st^ 

\P^ 

^ 

^t^ 

t-W 

Demco,  Inc.  38-293 

